Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

You might not want to back Reform to win the most seats even if you think Farage is going to be PM a

245

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,216
    "Brian Stelter posted a December 9, 2017, quote from the New York Times:

    "Before taking office, Mr. Trump told top aides to think of each presidential day as an episode in a television show in which he vanquishes rivals."

    Stelter wrote: “I think about this quote a lot.” "

    Heather Richardson email - 'Letters from an American'
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,941
    a
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Eating fresh watermelon. Truly the height of luxury.

    I can't offhand think of the circumstances whereby people would not eat fresh watermelon. I don't think they tin it, do they?
    I was more making a point about the total trivial pointlessness of my life here. I don't do ANYTHING and it is oddly satisfying

    Think of me as a pioneer for when the robots take over and we all have nothing to do with our pointless empty lives, except choose between fruits (fresh)
    What happens if the robots follow current fashion and determine on a rational basis that you are a useless recipient of aid?
    Current "AI" lies like Donald Trump.

    I've always been amused by the assumption in science fiction that AI would be smart.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,117
    edited February 7
    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation (or destroy Germany as a manufacturing power). It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of their industrial economies in order to create regional allies.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,066
    Techne has Labour and Reform 25%, Con 23%, LD 13%.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,941
    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Last night by elections showed Reform breaking through the 20% barrier and winning 30% and even 40% in Tendring. I dont see an alliance between Tories and Reform any time soon but there are many potential bumps in the road for Reform. Much better to bet against Labour. They are heading for a complete wipeout maybe existential threat. In Essex they are getting 3% in a council election in Essex and 5% in Surrey. This is getting to Panda joke status. At what time do the Labour MPs start to panic?

    From Election Maps UK:

    Aggregate Result of the 185 Council By-Elections (for 190 Seats) Since the 2024 General Election:

    LAB: 67 (-31)
    CON: 51 (+24)
    LDM: 35 (=)
    RFM: 10 (+10)
    IND: 9 (-2)
    GRN: 8 (+2)
    SNP: 6 (-1)
    PLC: 2 (=)
    LOC: 2 (-2)

    So, Labour are losing lots of seats, but they’re still the biggest winner of by-elections. They’re not being wiped out.
    What are Reforms policies for local government?
    Yes.

    Oh, you want actual policies? Why do they need them? Voting Reform at local authority level is voting to express that the community and local economy is broken and no other party has demonstrated they can fix it - or even that they understand that its broken.

    Reform's policies? Fix things. Hopefully.
    What are Labour's policies? Does anyone know? Do they have any? They are in GOVERNMENT and we still don't know

    They might do something about social care and the NHS... after a report in 2028

    Immigiration, who knows. The EU, shrug. Environment yes no Heathrow maybe no yes

    The only solid policy Labour has is to give £18bn to Mauritius for no reason, so that British grannies can die of hypothermia

    So, this isn't quite the own you think it is
    We're talking about local government love, not national.
    I'm equally clueless as to Labour's local government policies. AFAIK they don't have any. And I am a politics GEEK

    And recall this is a feature not a bug. Skyr Toolmakersson was apparently appalled to discover, when entering Number 10, that there "was no plan"

    Farage would have to be really really shite to be worse than that
    This is British politics. We're talking about world-beating expertise in being really really shite here.
    Peruvian politicians - "Hold my Pisco Sour and watch this...."
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353
    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation. It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of its industrial economy in order to create a regional ally.
    You fucking idiot:

    "As Essex rightly contends, USAID is one of the more deeply internationalized institutions within the US state and thus offers a key site through which to examine the historical and evolving nature of US hegemony. In detailing the various forces that have shaped this agency and its work abroad, Essex provides insight into how the United States has sought to remake developing states and ‘bring them under the umbrella of American hegemony’ (Essex, 2013: 86)."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,613

    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    As I said on a thread yesterday, the reality that Reform are doing very well and gaining a lot of ground will force a change in strategy from the other parties. How that plays out remains to be sen, but there is little chance that today's trends continue without alteration.

    That's how democracy should work, but in the US the alt-liberals ignored the signs of changing public opinion which allowed Trump to win twice. They preferred to lose than compromise on anything.
    You're always very keen to put responsibility for Trump's choices on his opponents.

    The Democrats messed up royally but the actual Harris campaign was far from the radical AOC wing would present it. It wasnt enough/believed and the economy etc was considered more important by the voters, but it would be to misremember things to act like they made literally no attempt to modulate their message
    Every governing party across the world has seen their vote share fall since the inflation crisis sparked by Putins invasion. Harris did better than most of those. Her problem wasn't woke, leftism or hyper liberalism but inflation.

    Putin played a blinder.
    Russia's economy has also been hit
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,021
    So we’re now seeing confirmation that Ukraine advanced around 4km in to Kursk oblast yesterday.

    https://x.com/secretsqrl123/status/1887505490994733157
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,021

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation. It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of its industrial economy in order to create a regional ally.
    You fucking idiot:

    "As Essex rightly contends, USAID is one of the more deeply internationalized institutions within the US state and thus offers a key site through which to examine the historical and evolving nature of US hegemony. In detailing the various forces that have shaped this agency and its work abroad, Essex provides insight into how the United States has sought to remake developing states and ‘bring them under the umbrella of American hegemony’ (Essex, 2013: 86)."
    It's the same thing. Different ends of the telescope.

    To some people a radio station broadcasting from abroad was a beacon of truth. For others, the same radio station was an attack on the noble goals of Socialism and The People's State.
    What do you reckon a British DOGE uncovers?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation. It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of its industrial economy in order to create a regional ally.
    You fucking idiot:

    "As Essex rightly contends, USAID is one of the more deeply internationalized institutions within the US state and thus offers a key site through which to examine the historical and evolving nature of US hegemony. In detailing the various forces that have shaped this agency and its work abroad, Essex provides insight into how the United States has sought to remake developing states and ‘bring them under the umbrella of American hegemony’ (Essex, 2013: 86)."
    It's the same thing. Different ends of the telescope.

    To some people a radio station broadcasting from abroad was a beacon of truth. For others, the same radio station was an attack on the noble goals of Socialism and The People's State.
    True but/and I think that it is reasonable to take the motivation for setting up these kind of agencies from the horse's mouth as an indication of intent.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,607
    Sandpit said:

    So we’re now seeing confirmation that Ukraine advanced around 4km in to Kursk oblast yesterday.

    https://x.com/secretsqrl123/status/1887505490994733157

    Pro-Russian voices on Twix are appearing to get rather more "All the Ukrainians have been destroyed!!!!" in a way they only do when they're worried.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,220
    dixiedean said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Would have thought "massive racist" would have been essential on the person spec.
    That's interesting - I think he's one of the Musk Bros in short trousers who connected a commercial server to the USA's financial systems in violation of law, and stole the database.

    If he's out, does that mean he has been cast loose and could potentially be indicted. Chump has a record of cutting his fellow-criminals lose from previous cases when they were no longer any use to him.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    edited February 7
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, Reform aren't going to win anything (you heard it here first). They are the descendants of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists and that's not how we roll in this country.

    It wasn't how we rolled (although there's enough history of support for the radical right - and indeed, at times, the radical left - to show there's often been at times a significant undercurrent of support there).

    But to say that of now is to deliberately deny reality.

    Reform are just about leading in the polls. At the very least they're in something of a three-way tie. FON might have house effects that help Reform but all records will be outliers of some nature. Their 29% for Reform published yesterday is not only the highest ever UKIP/BxP/RefUK poll share but also the highest for any party in the last 16 national polls, the joint highest for any party in a poll conducted this year, the highest share for any right-of-centre party since November, and the highest share for any party other than Con/Lab since before the 2010 general election.

    And it's not just polls. Local by-elections are always a bit scattergun in what they throw up, and not always representative given local factors (which should even out over time), and disproportionate attention given them by parties (which shouldn't - but should actually work against Reform), but of yesterday's six seats up for grabs, admittedly in a relatively Reform-friendly bunch, Reform won three and finished a strong second in the other two they contested (failing to stand a candidate in the sixth). Yes, these are low-turnout elections but there's loads of evidence that they do tend to be broadly representative.

    All the data from many other similar countries, and from what's going on now in our own, point to the conclusion that Reform should absolutely be taken seriously as potential candidates to lead the next government, and that forming it outright is not out of the question.
    Do we have the makings of a wager? What odds do you suggest.
    Not really. Lots of moving parts and I'd need to think it through more thoroughly to make an offer. That said, the odds on most seats are easily commercially available so there's no incentive for one or the other of us to offer or accept less favourable terms.

    FWIW, I think the 5/2 from Ladbrokes on Reform most seats is ballpark but probably slightly generous. It's probably quite a steep slope for them to get up to 326 though: they won't get much out of Scotland, for example. I can't see odds for an outright win (oddschecker doesn't have the market but I've not checked the individual sites) but I wouldn't be backing south of 6/1. On the other hand, I'm not interested in laying a 17% return over four years with significant risk.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,607
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation. It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of its industrial economy in order to create a regional ally.
    You fucking idiot:

    "As Essex rightly contends, USAID is one of the more deeply internationalized institutions within the US state and thus offers a key site through which to examine the historical and evolving nature of US hegemony. In detailing the various forces that have shaped this agency and its work abroad, Essex provides insight into how the United States has sought to remake developing states and ‘bring them under the umbrella of American hegemony’ (Essex, 2013: 86)."
    It's the same thing. Different ends of the telescope.

    To some people a radio station broadcasting from abroad was a beacon of truth. For others, the same radio station was an attack on the noble goals of Socialism and The People's State.
    What do you reckon a British DOGE uncovers?
    It'd be a fucking disaster, in the same way the US one is being, and will be.

    People will die. And shits won't care.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,214
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Eating fresh watermelon. Truly the height of luxury.

    I can't offhand think of the circumstances whereby people would not eat fresh watermelon. I don't think they tin it, do they?
    I was more making a point about the total trivial pointlessness of my life here. I don't do ANYTHING and it is oddly satisfying

    Think of me as a pioneer for when the robots take over and we all have nothing to do with our pointless empty lives, except choose between fruits (fresh)
    We might have nothing to do, but we do stuff that we don't need to do for fun. I grow fruit and cook, neither of which I need to do, but do it because I enjoy it and get enormous satisfaction. Yesterday I was digging out a large compost heap to mulch my fruit. An utterly pointless exercise because Sainsbury's cuts out the need for that, but I enjoyed it and I enjoyed the feeling when finished (I only managed about 1/10th of it) and I savoured the beers in the pub more because I had done it.

    Later today you post a picture of your watermelon and I'll post a picture of my compost heap. Bet people can't wait. How can one resist a picture of a decent compost heap.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,431

    "Brian Stelter posted a December 9, 2017, quote from the New York Times:

    "Before taking office, Mr. Trump told top aides to think of each presidential day as an episode in a television show in which he vanquishes rivals."

    Stelter wrote: “I think about this quote a lot.” "

    Heather Richardson email - 'Letters from an American'

    Which reminds me, where's Alistair Cooke when you need him?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,125
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    They can see what’s actually important once the $60bn swamp has been drained. It’s probably a few hundred million of actual direct foreign aid. Right now they can’t see the wood for the trees.
    It's too late.

    They couldn't (even if they wanted to, which they didn't) un-destroy the things they have already destroyed - such as all the clinical trials they instructed to be stopped mid-stream denying the volunteers the care they need for the duration in case eg of complications as a result of the experimental medicines.

    This is on a walking into an ICU and unplugging all the machines level of vandalism, then thinking you can turn the dead patients back on after they have expired.

    Just the clinical trials cancellations are in violation of all the principles and standards of medical ethics. They will never be trusted again, and have put a captive bullet into their soft power.
    "Maybe cutting that project was a mistake, but it's too late now..."
    I posted an article earlier that outlines what they have done, and how it impacts people taking part in clinical trials which the US had agreed to fund throughout. The action by Rubio, Trump & co is psychopathic. Which is of course how Trump has always rolled.

    They went so far as to instruct medical teams doing clinical trials not to do any more work, which left patients with medical devices installed which staff were instructed not to remove, or having treatment stopped half way through which leaves risks of pathogens developing immunity far more likely. One was a trial with a inoculation related to a standard aids treatment, which places the standard treatment at risk of having immunity develop when the trial was stopped in its tracks.

    https://archive.is/20250206231120/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/06/health/usaid-clinical-trials-funding-trump.html
    It's in the details that the real evil of this regime becomes apparent.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, Reform aren't going to win anything (you heard it here first). They are the descendants of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists and that's not how we roll in this country.

    It wasn't how we rolled (although there's enough history of support for the radical right - and indeed, at times, the radical left - to show there's often been at times a significant undercurrent of support there).

    But to say that of now is to deliberately deny reality.

    Reform are just about leading in the polls. At the very least they're in something of a three-way tie. FON might have house effects that help Reform but all records will be outliers of some nature. Their 29% for Reform published yesterday is not only the highest ever UKIP/BxP/RefUK poll share but also the highest for any party in the last 16 national polls, the joint highest for any party in a poll conducted this year, the highest share for any right-of-centre party since November, and the highest share for any party other than Con/Lab since before the 2010 general election.

    And it's not just polls. Local by-elections are always a bit scattergun in what they throw up, and not always representative given local factors (which should even out over time), and disproportionate attention given them by parties (which shouldn't - but should actually work against Reform), but of yesterday's six seats up for grabs, admittedly in a relatively Reform-friendly bunch, Reform won three and finished a strong second in the other two they contested (failing to stand a candidate in the sixth). Yes, these are low-turnout elections but there's loads of evidence that they do tend to be broadly representative.

    All the data from many other similar countries, and from what's going on now in our own, point to the conclusion that Reform should absolutely be taken seriously as potential candidates to lead the next government, and that forming it outright is not out of the question.
    Do we have the makings of a wager? What odds do you suggest.
    Not really. Lots of moving parts and I'd need to think it through more thoroughly to make an offer. That said, the odds on most seats are easily commercially available so there's no incentive for one or the other of us to offer or accept less favourable terms.

    FWIW, I think the 5/2 from Ladbrokes on Reform most seats is ballpark but probably slightly generous. It's probably quite a steep slope for them to get up to 326 though: they won't get much out of Scotland, for example. I can't see odds for an outright win (oddschecker doesn't have the market but I've not checked the individual sites) but I wouldn't be backing south of 6/1. On the other hand, I'm not interested in laying a 17% return over four years with significant risk.
    Fair enough. I said Reform "aren't going to win anything". I have no doubt that they will win some seats. But they aren't going to win the next GE so we seem to be in agreement.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,117
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation. It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of its industrial economy in order to create a regional ally.
    You fucking idiot:

    "As Essex rightly contends, USAID is one of the more deeply internationalized institutions within the US state and thus offers a key site through which to examine the historical and evolving nature of US hegemony. In detailing the various forces that have shaped this agency and its work abroad, Essex provides insight into how the United States has sought to remake developing states and ‘bring them under the umbrella of American hegemony’ (Essex, 2013: 86)."
    "Hegemony"; "Imperialusm"
    You're just spouting sixth form politics buzzwords, with zero analysis.

    "USAID is deeply internationalized" .. who knew ?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353
    edited February 7
    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation. It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of its industrial economy in order to create a regional ally.
    You fucking idiot:

    "As Essex rightly contends, USAID is one of the more deeply internationalized institutions within the US state and thus offers a key site through which to examine the historical and evolving nature of US hegemony. In detailing the various forces that have shaped this agency and its work abroad, Essex provides insight into how the United States has sought to remake developing states and ‘bring them under the umbrella of American hegemony’ (Essex, 2013: 86)."
    "Hegemony"; "Imperialusm"
    You're just spouting sixth form politics buzzwords, with zero analysis.

    "USAID is deeply internationalized" .. who knew ?
    You really are in denial about this. I appreciate that you have your perceived PB integrity to protect but do you not see how you are shredding it every time you respond to one of my comments.

    These type of agencies, of which USAID was a key example, were set up around the time of the Cold War to project US power around the globe. Now you can call that hegemony, or imperialism, or projecting US power around the globe, it matters not.

    The issue is that they did and continue to do this. That you deny the premise is a) intriguing and inexplicable; and b) evidence that you are a fucking idiot.

    Is all.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,613
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Last night by elections showed Reform breaking through the 20% barrier and winning 30% and even 40% in Tendring. I dont see an alliance between Tories and Reform any time soon but there are many potential bumps in the road for Reform. Much better to bet against Labour. They are heading for a complete wipeout maybe existential threat. In Essex they are getting 3% in a council election in Essex and 5% in Surrey. This is getting to Panda joke status. At what time do the Labour MPs start to panic?

    From Election Maps UK:

    Aggregate Result of the 185 Council By-Elections (for 190 Seats) Since the 2024 General Election:

    LAB: 67 (-31)
    CON: 51 (+24)
    LDM: 35 (=)
    RFM: 10 (+10)
    IND: 9 (-2)
    GRN: 8 (+2)
    SNP: 6 (-1)
    PLC: 2 (=)
    LOC: 2 (-2)

    So, Labour are losing lots of seats, but they’re still the biggest winner of by-elections. They’re not being wiped out.
    What are Reforms policies for local government?
    Yes.

    Oh, you want actual policies? Why do they need them? Voting Reform at local authority level is voting to express that the community and local economy is broken and no other party has demonstrated they can fix it - or even that they understand that its broken.

    Reform's policies? Fix things. Hopefully.
    What are Labour's policies? Does anyone know? Do they have any? They are in GOVERNMENT and we still don't know

    They might do something about social care and the NHS... after a report in 2028

    Immigiration, who knows. The EU, shrug. Environment yes no Heathrow maybe no yes

    The only solid policy Labour has is to give £18bn to Mauritius for no reason, so that British grannies can die of hypothermia

    So, this isn't quite the own you think it is
    We're talking about local government love, not national.
    I'm equally clueless as to Labour's local government policies. AFAIK they don't have any. And I am a politics GEEK

    And recall this is a feature not a bug. Skyr Toolmakersson was apparently appalled to discover, when entering Number 10, that there "was no plan"

    Farage would have to be really really shite to be worse than that
    Locally we are getting an elected Mayor of Essex next year and unitary councils to replace the county and district councils
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,955
    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
    Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.

    If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.

    That seems... illogical. Unless you are saying that giving someone life-saving humanitarian aid is exactly the same as launching an illegal invasion.

    It would help if you give an example of an 'absolutely stark raving mad' post from the
    previous thread.
    Not really. I do think it’s a false dichotomy though.

    He’s stating a binary choice: either you are ok with the US intervening in other countries or not.

    USAID vs military force is tactical not strategic
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,868
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Last night by elections showed Reform breaking through the 20% barrier and winning 30% and even 40% in Tendring. I dont see an alliance between Tories and Reform any time soon but there are many potential bumps in the road for Reform. Much better to bet against Labour. They are heading for a complete wipeout maybe existential threat. In Essex they are getting 3% in a council election in Essex and 5% in Surrey. This is getting to Panda joke status. At what time do the Labour MPs start to panic?

    From Election Maps UK:

    Aggregate Result of the 185 Council By-Elections (for 190 Seats) Since the 2024 General Election:

    LAB: 67 (-31)
    CON: 51 (+24)
    LDM: 35 (=)
    RFM: 10 (+10)
    IND: 9 (-2)
    GRN: 8 (+2)
    SNP: 6 (-1)
    PLC: 2 (=)
    LOC: 2 (-2)

    So, Labour are losing lots of seats, but they’re still the biggest winner of by-elections. They’re not being wiped out.
    What are Reforms policies for local government?
    Yes.

    Oh, you want actual policies? Why do they need them? Voting Reform at local authority level is voting to express that the community and local economy is broken and no other party has demonstrated they can fix it - or even that they understand that its broken.

    Reform's policies? Fix things. Hopefully.
    What are Labour's policies? Does anyone know? Do they have any? They are in GOVERNMENT and we still don't know

    They might do something about social care and the NHS... after a report in 2028

    Immigiration, who knows. The EU, shrug. Environment yes no Heathrow maybe no yes

    The only solid policy Labour has is to give £18bn to Mauritius for no reason, so that British grannies can die of hypothermia

    So, this isn't quite the own you think it is
    We're talking about local government love, not national.
    I'm equally clueless as to Labour's local government policies. AFAIK they don't have any. And I am a politics GEEK

    And recall this is a feature not a bug. Skyr Toolmakersson was apparently appalled to discover, when entering Number 10, that there "was no plan"

    Farage would have to be really really shite to be worse than that
    Really? Who did he think would be in possession of a 'plan', if not him?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,436
    edited February 7
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Battlebus said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Don't you have a home to go to?
    Yeah, I do, but it's in London where it is

    <<< checks app >>>

    5C, grey, and windy, with cold rain expected

    Here in Klong Theoi, Bangkok, it is

    33C, with a pure blue sky, soft breeze, and a prospect of fresh watermelon, or mango, around 7pm
    Damn you, I’ve only got 26ºC today, and it’s a bit cloudy outside.

    But hey, it’s almost G&T o’clock.
    I would definitely prefer 26C to 33C.

    I find anything above 30c hard work. Now granted air con works but I do prefer to be outside if I can
    27-9C is about my ideal, I agree that over 30C is unnecessary. However it is stlll vastly preferable to 5C, grey, dank, dark, windy

    The "advantage" of a sunny 33C day is that you go indoors for the peak heat, and a siesta, in the arvo. And then as the sun and the heat ebb away there is this marvellous period, about 40 mins before sunset, when the world comes to life again. The hookers get off the Skytrain in their hotpants, the fresh melon mongers appear under the flickering lamps, the first gin and tonics are served by the sugar palms of Det 5, and all is right with the world, as the tropical moon emerges above the glitter'in skyscrapers
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,431
    Sean_F said:

    Techne has Labour and Reform 25%, Con 23%, LD 13%.

    WWIW I think that's is also about the best estimate of current reality. But also there's not much doubt that Lab and Con are on a falling trajectory and Reform (and very gently LDs) on a rising one. The trend of the next month will be interesting.

    A question will be to what extent the fate of Reform has any link to their potential voters view of how Trumpism is getting on. I think Reform needs to create and keep distance. But I accept this may, sadly, be wrong. The next few weeks may start giving an indication. Reform are solidly up a point or two since Trump's inauguration.
  • hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 678

    Last night by elections showed Reform breaking through the 20% barrier and winning 30% and even 40% in Tendring. I dont see an alliance between Tories and Reform any time soon but there are many potential bumps in the road for Reform. Much better to bet against Labour. They are heading for a complete wipeout maybe existential threat. In Essex they are getting 3% in a council election in Essex and 5% in Surrey. This is getting to Panda joke status. At what time do the Labour MPs start to panic?

    From Election Maps UK:

    Aggregate Result of the 185 Council By-Elections (for 190 Seats) Since the 2024 General Election:

    LAB: 67 (-31)
    CON: 51 (+24)
    LDM: 35 (=)
    RFM: 10 (+10)
    IND: 9 (-2)
    GRN: 8 (+2)
    SNP: 6 (-1)
    PLC: 2 (=)
    LOC: 2 (-2)

    So, Labour are losing lots of seats, but they’re still the biggest winner of by-elections. They’re not being wiped out.
    One-third of Labour seats lost in 7 months...
    There are two counterpoints to this.
    1.Labour vote has been dropping from 33% right after the General Election to 24.4% now
    2.Many of the seats being fought were due to the councillor becoming an MP so you would expect them to be Labour.

    The Labour party seems to be in denial about how unpopular it has become in vast swathes of the country. Not sure why this is. My thoughts are as follows.
    1. Reform making less headway in London and the middle class.
    2. Underestimating how important social media has become
    3. Arrogance

    My hypothesis is that Labour are going to lose power not at Westminster but everywhere else such as local level and the devolved authorities. At some point it is going to become apparent that they have no clear mandate to run the country and this will make it virtually impossible to do anything. What happens then is anyone's guess.


  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
    Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.

    If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.

    That seems... illogical. Unless you are saying that giving someone life-saving humanitarian aid is exactly the same as launching an illegal invasion.

    It would help if you give an example of an 'absolutely stark raving mad' post from the
    previous thread.
    Not really. I do think it’s a false dichotomy though.

    He’s stating a binary choice: either you are ok with the US intervening in other countries or not.

    USAID vs military force is tactical not strategic
    A subsidiary point is to marvel at people who think that nice, old USAID just goes around the world helping the needy with no ulterior motive. Now of course the needy get help (there is a whole separate thread about this - I am of the Linda Polman school) but that is beside the point that USAID is a tool of US cultural imperialism.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,955
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    You really are an idiot. Soz. But really, go do some research. Since the Cold War the US has sought to project soft (and hard) power around the globe and USAID was a key component of that.

    "Since its establishment during the height of the Cold War, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) has served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad. Despite the agency’s centrality as a US foreign policy tool, however, as Jamey Essex (2013) observes, relatively scant attention has been paid to the logics and frameworks that shape USAID’s inner workings and external relations. Essex’s book is a considerable contribution on this score. Development, Security, and Aid: Geopolitics and Geoeconomics at the U.S. Agency for International Development offers an incisive account of the ways in which the entwined but distinct geostrategic discourses of geopolitics and geoeconomics shape the internal workings of USAID and, in turn, its..."

    From the very first wiki article. Knock yourself out (as they want us to say) with further information about it.
    Bet you that wiki article was written by Jamey Essex…
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,338
    edited February 7
    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation (or destroy Germany as a manufacturing power). It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of their industrial economies in order to create regional allies.
    As a matter of definition, economic policies, like the Marshall Plan, are generally considered hard power, not soft, which is more about subtle, indirect influence. A good example of soft power is Radio Free Europe, which influenced rather than commanded.

    As a matter of fact, the US did not "finance the rebuilding of their industrial economies" - 85-90% of the investment in European industry in the five years of the Marshall Plan was domestically generated. The plan's direct influence has been vastly overstated, and what influence it had came mostly from the framework of rules and regulations that the Americans insist that recipient countries establish as a condition of the aid (moving towards freer trade, currency convertibility, management and productivity advice from the ECA, etc), at a time when many were tempted by extreme socialism or Communism.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    As I said on a thread yesterday, the reality that Reform are doing very well and gaining a lot of ground will force a change in strategy from the other parties. How that plays out remains to be sen, but there is little chance that today's trends continue without alteration.

    That's how democracy should work, but in the US the alt-liberals ignored the signs of changing public opinion which allowed Trump to win twice. They preferred to lose than compromise on anything.
    You're always very keen to put responsibility for Trump's choices on his opponents.

    The Democrats messed up royally but the actual Harris campaign was far from the radical AOC wing would present it. It wasnt enough/believed and the economy etc was considered more important by the voters, but it would be to misremember things to act like they made literally no attempt to modulate their message
    Every governing party across the world has seen their vote share fall since the inflation crisis sparked by Putins invasion. Harris did better than most of those. Her problem wasn't woke, leftism or hyper liberalism but inflation.

    Putin played a blinder.
    Russia's economy has also been hit
    Biden also singularly failed to nail the inflation on Trump, for his enormous budget deficits and demands for low interest rates, even when the economy was rattling along quite nicely. Where could all that money go but into chasing up prices? Not to mention the Putin-Trump links to reinforce the point.

    Anyway, there's been more than one Russian leader (and regime) brought down by a bad war. This play isn't over yet.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, Reform aren't going to win anything (you heard it here first). They are the descendants of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists and that's not how we roll in this country.

    It wasn't how we rolled (although there's enough history of support for the radical right - and indeed, at times, the radical left - to show there's often been at times a significant undercurrent of support there).

    But to say that of now is to deliberately deny reality.

    Reform are just about leading in the polls. At the very least they're in something of a three-way tie. FON might have house effects that help Reform but all records will be outliers of some nature. Their 29% for Reform published yesterday is not only the highest ever UKIP/BxP/RefUK poll share but also the highest for any party in the last 16 national polls, the joint highest for any party in a poll conducted this year, the highest share for any right-of-centre party since November, and the highest share for any party other than Con/Lab since before the 2010 general election.

    And it's not just polls. Local by-elections are always a bit scattergun in what they throw up, and not always representative given local factors (which should even out over time), and disproportionate attention given them by parties (which shouldn't - but should actually work against Reform), but of yesterday's six seats up for grabs, admittedly in a relatively Reform-friendly bunch, Reform won three and finished a strong second in the other two they contested (failing to stand a candidate in the sixth). Yes, these are low-turnout elections but there's loads of evidence that they do tend to be broadly representative.

    All the data from many other similar countries, and from what's going on now in our own, point to the conclusion that Reform should absolutely be taken seriously as potential candidates to lead the next government, and that forming it outright is not out of the question.
    Do we have the makings of a wager? What odds do you suggest.
    Not really. Lots of moving parts and I'd need to think it through more thoroughly to make an offer. That said, the odds on most seats are easily commercially available so there's no incentive for one or the other of us to offer or accept less favourable terms.

    FWIW, I think the 5/2 from Ladbrokes on Reform most seats is ballpark but probably slightly generous. It's probably quite a steep slope for them to get up to 326 though: they won't get much out of Scotland, for example. I can't see odds for an outright win (oddschecker doesn't have the market but I've not checked the individual sites) but I wouldn't be backing south of 6/1. On the other hand, I'm not interested in laying a 17% return over four years with significant risk.
    Fair enough. I said Reform "aren't going to win anything". I have no doubt that they will win some seats. But they aren't going to win the next GE so we seem to be in agreement.
    Depends what you mean. I don't accept "aren't going to win", which implies a negligible chance. "Probably won't win most seats" and "are unlikely to win outright" I would agree with.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353
    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Battlebus said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Don't you have a home to go to?
    Yeah, I do, but it's in London where it is

    <<< checks app >>>

    5C, grey, and windy, with cold rain expected

    Here in Klong Theoi, Bangkok, it is

    33C, with a pure blue sky, soft breeze, and a prospect of fresh watermelon, or mango, around 7pm
    Damn you, I’ve only got 26ºC today, and it’s a bit cloudy outside.

    But hey, it’s almost G&T o’clock.
    I would definitely prefer 26C to 33C.

    I find anything above 30c hard work. Now granted air con works but I do prefer to be outside if I can
    27-9C is about my ideal, I agree that over 30C is unnecessary. However it is stlll vastly preferable to 5C, grey, dank, dark, windy

    The "advantage" of a sunny 33C day is that you go indoors for the peak heat, and a siesta, in the arvo. And then as the sun and the heat ebb away there is this marvellous period, about 40 mins before sunset, when the world comes to life again. The hookers get off the Skytrain in their hotpants, the fresh melon mongers appear under the flickering lamps, the first gin and tonics are served by the sugar palms of Det 5, and all is right with the world, as the tropical moon emerges above the glitter'in skyscrapers
    Coming back to our "coming home" discussions of old, it is to a very large extent, perhaps wholly made "real" only once you have related it to the denizens of PB who are back in the UK. That is your anchor to the world whereby you can relate your current otherwise rootless experiences. People need roots and while London might not be yours, and you don't care anyway, PB certainly is.

    And, of course, we are delighted to fulfil that role. You wouldn't be the only contributor to whom it applies.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, Reform aren't going to win anything (you heard it here first). They are the descendants of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists and that's not how we roll in this country.

    It wasn't how we rolled (although there's enough history of support for the radical right - and indeed, at times, the radical left - to show there's often been at times a significant undercurrent of support there).

    But to say that of now is to deliberately deny reality.

    Reform are just about leading in the polls. At the very least they're in something of a three-way tie. FON might have house effects that help Reform but all records will be outliers of some nature. Their 29% for Reform published yesterday is not only the highest ever UKIP/BxP/RefUK poll share but also the highest for any party in the last 16 national polls, the joint highest for any party in a poll conducted this year, the highest share for any right-of-centre party since November, and the highest share for any party other than Con/Lab since before the 2010 general election.

    And it's not just polls. Local by-elections are always a bit scattergun in what they throw up, and not always representative given local factors (which should even out over time), and disproportionate attention given them by parties (which shouldn't - but should actually work against Reform), but of yesterday's six seats up for grabs, admittedly in a relatively Reform-friendly bunch, Reform won three and finished a strong second in the other two they contested (failing to stand a candidate in the sixth). Yes, these are low-turnout elections but there's loads of evidence that they do tend to be broadly representative.

    All the data from many other similar countries, and from what's going on now in our own, point to the conclusion that Reform should absolutely be taken seriously as potential candidates to lead the next government, and that forming it outright is not out of the question.
    Do we have the makings of a wager? What odds do you suggest.
    Not really. Lots of moving parts and I'd need to think it through more thoroughly to make an offer. That said, the odds on most seats are easily commercially available so there's no incentive for one or the other of us to offer or accept less favourable terms.

    FWIW, I think the 5/2 from Ladbrokes on Reform most seats is ballpark but probably slightly generous. It's probably quite a steep slope for them to get up to 326 though: they won't get much out of Scotland, for example. I can't see odds for an outright win (oddschecker doesn't have the market but I've not checked the individual sites) but I wouldn't be backing south of 6/1. On the other hand, I'm not interested in laying a 17% return over four years with significant risk.
    Fair enough. I said Reform "aren't going to win anything". I have no doubt that they will win some seats. But they aren't going to win the next GE so we seem to be in agreement.
    Depends what you mean. I don't accept "aren't going to win", which implies a negligible chance. "Probably won't win most seats" and "are unlikely to win outright" I would agree with.
    They aren't going to win. They have a negligible chance of winning most seats or outright.

    We are a betting site, after all, so let me know how you would like to reflect your views.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    You really are an idiot. Soz. But really, go do some research. Since the Cold War the US has sought to project soft (and hard) power around the globe and USAID was a key component of that.

    "Since its establishment during the height of the Cold War, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) has served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad. Despite the agency’s centrality as a US foreign policy tool, however, as Jamey Essex (2013) observes, relatively scant attention has been paid to the logics and frameworks that shape USAID’s inner workings and external relations. Essex’s book is a considerable contribution on this score. Development, Security, and Aid: Geopolitics and Geoeconomics at the U.S. Agency for International Development offers an incisive account of the ways in which the entwined but distinct geostrategic discourses of geopolitics and geoeconomics shape the internal workings of USAID and, in turn, its..."

    From the very first wiki article. Knock yourself out (as they want us to say) with further information about it.
    Bet you that wiki article was written by Jamey Essex…
    LOL even he would understand.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,091
    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Battlebus said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Don't you have a home to go to?
    Yeah, I do, but it's in London where it is

    <<< checks app >>>

    5C, grey, and windy, with cold rain expected

    Here in Klong Theoi, Bangkok, it is

    33C, with a pure blue sky, soft breeze, and a prospect of fresh watermelon, or mango, around 7pm
    Damn you, I’ve only got 26ºC today, and it’s a bit cloudy outside.

    But hey, it’s almost G&T o’clock.
    I would definitely prefer 26C to 33C.

    I find anything above 30c hard work. Now granted air con works but I do prefer to be outside if I can
    27-9C is about my ideal, I agree that over 30C is unnecessary. However it is stlll vastly preferable to 5C, grey, dank, dark, windy

    The "advantage" of a sunny 33C day is that you go indoors for the peak heat, and a siesta, in the arvo. And then as the sun and the heat ebb away there is this marvellous period, about 40 mins before sunset, when the world comes to life again. The hookers get off the Skytrain in their hotpants, the fresh melon mongers appear under the flickering lamps, the first gin and tonics are served by the sugar palms of Det 5, and all is right with the world, as the tropical moon emerges above the glitter'in skyscrapers
    You can take a boy out of cornwall...
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,431

    Last night by elections showed Reform breaking through the 20% barrier and winning 30% and even 40% in Tendring. I dont see an alliance between Tories and Reform any time soon but there are many potential bumps in the road for Reform. Much better to bet against Labour. They are heading for a complete wipeout maybe existential threat. In Essex they are getting 3% in a council election in Essex and 5% in Surrey. This is getting to Panda joke status. At what time do the Labour MPs start to panic?

    From Election Maps UK:

    Aggregate Result of the 185 Council By-Elections (for 190 Seats) Since the 2024 General Election:

    LAB: 67 (-31)
    CON: 51 (+24)
    LDM: 35 (=)
    RFM: 10 (+10)
    IND: 9 (-2)
    GRN: 8 (+2)
    SNP: 6 (-1)
    PLC: 2 (=)
    LOC: 2 (-2)

    So, Labour are losing lots of seats, but they’re still the biggest winner of by-elections. They’re not being wiped out.
    One-third of Labour seats lost in 7 months...
    There are two counterpoints to this.
    1.Labour vote has been dropping from 33% right after the General Election to 24.4% now
    2.Many of the seats being fought were due to the councillor becoming an MP so you would expect them to be Labour.

    The Labour party seems to be in denial about how unpopular it has become in vast swathes of the country. Not sure why this is. My thoughts are as follows.
    1. Reform making less headway in London and the middle class.
    2. Underestimating how important social media has become
    3. Arrogance

    My hypothesis is that Labour are going to lose power not at Westminster but everywhere else such as local level and the devolved authorities. At some point it is going to become apparent that they have no clear mandate to run the country and this will make it virtually impossible to do anything. What happens then is anyone's guess.


    As and when Labour's practical mandate runs out, as suggested here, then we can exclude for now and for many months to come the Tories having a mandate in any psychological or communal sense. Reform are nowhere close to having a programme that could be implemented... Step forward LDs.

    Any constituency by-election, more or less anywhere without exception in the current climate is going to be gold plated dynamite.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    MattW said:

    dixiedean said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Would have thought "massive racist" would have been essential on the person spec.
    That's interesting - I think he's one of the Musk Bros in short trousers who connected a commercial server to the USA's financial systems in violation of law, and stole the database.

    If he's out, does that mean he has been cast loose and could potentially be indicted. Chump has a record of cutting his fellow-criminals lose from previous cases when they were no longer any use to him.
    He pardoned 1500 Jan 6 supporters. Trump only tends to cut people loose if they turn against him, or he believes they have.

    In this case, the kid must know plenty. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a pardon-and-shut-up offer available.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353
    edited February 7
    I mean this stuff is not difficult to understand, Nige. Here's one from the "Black Agenda Report" - whatever that is.

    https://www.blackagendareport.com/weaponizing-aid-how-usaid-and-global-fragility-act-sustain-us-imperialism-libya
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 795

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    They can see what’s actually important once the $60bn swamp has been drained. It’s probably a few hundred million of actual direct foreign aid. Right now they can’t see the wood for the trees.
    It's too late.

    They couldn't (even if they wanted to, which they didn't) un-destroy the things they have already destroyed - such as all the clinical trials they instructed to be stopped mid-stream denying the volunteers the care they need for the duration in case eg of complications as a result of the experimental medicines.

    This is on a walking into an ICU and unplugging all the machines level of vandalism, then thinking you can turn the dead patients back on after they have expired.

    Just the clinical trials cancellations are in violation of all the principles and standards of medical ethics. They will never be trusted again, and have put a captive bullet into their soft power.
    "Maybe cutting that project was a mistake, but it's too late now..."
    I posted an article earlier that outlines what they have done, and how it impacts people taking part in clinical trials which the US had agreed to fund throughout. The action by Rubio, Trump & co is psychopathic. Which is of course how Trump has always rolled.

    They went so far as to instruct medical teams doing clinical trials not to do any more work, which left patients with medical devices installed which staff were instructed not to remove, or having treatment stopped half way through which leaves risks of pathogens developing immunity far more likely. One was a trial with a inoculation related to a standard aids treatment, which places the standard treatment at risk of having immunity develop when the trial was stopped in its tracks.

    https://archive.is/20250206231120/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/06/health/usaid-clinical-trials-funding-trump.html
    It's in the details that the real evil of this regime becomes apparent.
    Laws 4 and 5 and a proliferation of "bandits"
  • Good morning

    This mornings Guardian and Daily Mail both headline fears of stagflation

    Not good for Starmer and Reeves when both left and right newspapers raise the spectre of stagflation
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,607
    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
    Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.

    If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.

    That seems... illogical. Unless you are saying that giving someone life-saving humanitarian aid is exactly the same as launching an illegal invasion.

    It would help if you give an example of an 'absolutely stark raving mad' post from the
    previous thread.
    Not really. I do think it’s a false dichotomy though.

    He’s stating a binary choice: either you are ok with the US intervening in other countries or not.

    USAID vs military force is tactical not strategic
    A subsidiary point is to marvel at people who think that nice, old USAID just goes around the world helping the needy with no ulterior motive. Now of course the needy get help (there is a whole separate thread about this - I am of the Linda Polman school) but that is beside the point that USAID is a tool of US cultural imperialism.
    I agree that *any* international aid - not just US aid - comes with ulterior motives. Though those motives may be rather vague and nebulous, and even contradictory between different dempartments.

    But ulterior motives can be positive, as well as negative. In addition, aid does not have to be a zero-sum game. If we just take it to money; spending a little money now can save a heck of a lot of money in the future.

    USAid spent a heck of a lot of money fighting Ebola in Africa (*). I'd argue that that money has more than paid for itself, both financially and, if we want to bring morality into it, morally. No-one gains from an Ebola outbreak.

    And ebola is just one example.

    (*) Work you cannot easily see, as their webpage has been replaced with an unnavigable splash screen - https://www.usaid.gov/ - so much for openness. You can see an archive here: https://2017-2020.usaid.gov/ebola
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,436
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Battlebus said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Don't you have a home to go to?
    Yeah, I do, but it's in London where it is

    <<< checks app >>>

    5C, grey, and windy, with cold rain expected

    Here in Klong Theoi, Bangkok, it is

    33C, with a pure blue sky, soft breeze, and a prospect of fresh watermelon, or mango, around 7pm
    Damn you, I’ve only got 26ºC today, and it’s a bit cloudy outside.

    But hey, it’s almost G&T o’clock.
    I would definitely prefer 26C to 33C.

    I find anything above 30c hard work. Now granted air con works but I do prefer to be outside if I can
    27-9C is about my ideal, I agree that over 30C is unnecessary. However it is stlll vastly preferable to 5C, grey, dank, dark, windy

    The "advantage" of a sunny 33C day is that you go indoors for the peak heat, and a siesta, in the arvo. And then as the sun and the heat ebb away there is this marvellous period, about 40 mins before sunset, when the world comes to life again. The hookers get off the Skytrain in their hotpants, the fresh melon mongers appear under the flickering lamps, the first gin and tonics are served by the sugar palms of Det 5, and all is right with the world, as the tropical moon emerges above the glitter'in skyscrapers
    Coming back to our "coming home" discussions of old, it is to a very large extent, perhaps wholly made "real" only once you have related it to the denizens of PB who are back in the UK. That is your anchor to the world whereby you can relate your current otherwise rootless experiences. People need roots and while London might not be yours, and you don't care anyway, PB certainly is.

    And, of course, we are delighted to fulfil that role. You wouldn't be the only contributor to whom it applies.
    I wouldn't deny it

    The internet is great for this. It allows me to travel the world yet still have several places where I can feel "home" - PB is one, also a few WhatsApp groups, subreddits, Substack, TwiX, etc

    I am not sure my itinerant life would be tolerable without it. Indeed, likely not

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,648

    MattW said:

    dixiedean said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Would have thought "massive racist" would have been essential on the person spec.
    That's interesting - I think he's one of the Musk Bros in short trousers who connected a commercial server to the USA's financial systems in violation of law, and stole the database.

    If he's out, does that mean he has been cast loose and could potentially be indicted. Chump has a record of cutting his fellow-criminals lose from previous cases when they were no longer any use to him.
    He pardoned 1500 Jan 6 supporters. Trump only tends to cut people loose if they turn against him, or he believes they have.

    In this case, the kid must know plenty. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a pardon-and-shut-up offer available.
    IIRC accessing the tax records of a US citizen is a civil offense and therefore can't be pardoned. $1000 per...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Battlebus said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Don't you have a home to go to?
    Yeah, I do, but it's in London where it is

    <<< checks app >>>

    5C, grey, and windy, with cold rain expected

    Here in Klong Theoi, Bangkok, it is

    33C, with a pure blue sky, soft breeze, and a prospect of fresh watermelon, or mango, around 7pm
    Damn you, I’ve only got 26ºC today, and it’s a bit cloudy outside.

    But hey, it’s almost G&T o’clock.
    I would definitely prefer 26C to 33C.

    I find anything above 30c hard work. Now granted air con works but I do prefer to be outside if I can
    27-9C is about my ideal, I agree that over 30C is unnecessary. However it is stlll vastly preferable to 5C, grey, dank, dark, windy

    The "advantage" of a sunny 33C day is that you go indoors for the peak heat, and a siesta, in the arvo. And then as the sun and the heat ebb away there is this marvellous period, about 40 mins before sunset, when the world comes to life again. The hookers get off the Skytrain in their hotpants, the fresh melon mongers appear under the flickering lamps, the first gin and tonics are served by the sugar palms of Det 5, and all is right with the world, as the tropical moon emerges above the glitter'in skyscrapers
    Coming back to our "coming home" discussions of old, it is to a very large extent, perhaps wholly made "real" only once you have related it to the denizens of PB who are back in the UK. That is your anchor to the world whereby you can relate your current otherwise rootless experiences. People need roots and while London might not be yours, and you don't care anyway, PB certainly is.

    And, of course, we are delighted to fulfil that role. You wouldn't be the only contributor to whom it applies.
    I wouldn't deny it

    The internet is great for this. It allows me to travel the world yet still have several places where I can feel "home" - PB is one, also a few WhatsApp groups, subreddits, Substack, TwiX, etc

    I am not sure my itinerant life would be tolerable without it. Indeed, likely not

    It wasn't a criticism or snipe. Just an observation.
  • Good morning

    This mornings Guardian and Daily Mail both headline fears of stagflation

    Not good for Starmer and Reeves when both left and right newspapers raise the spectre of stagflation

    We've been stagflating for a while already...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,619

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Being massively racist is the not particularly hidden subplot behind the anti-DEI programme. This guy can count himself unlucky to be fired for it.
  • At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,607
    FF43 said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Being massively racist is the not particularly hidden subplot behind the anti-DEI programme. This guy can count himself unlucky to be fired for it.
    IMV many of the anti-DEI types tend to be rather racist anyway; or at least, as we see on here, blind to racism. It's almost as though they require some DEI training... ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,021
    Democrat Senators spent 30 hours trying to filibuster the nomination of Russ Vought as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, a role he previously held under Trump in 2020.

    https://x.com/gunthereagleman/status/1887659875330560005

    He still got confirmed.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,816
    a
    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
    Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.

    If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.

    Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
    What is wrong about it.
    One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
    translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.

    I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
    So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
    I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
    1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand.
    2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.

    I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
    It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.

    USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).

    So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.

    Your welcome.
    I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    FF43 said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Being massively racist is the not particularly hidden subplot behind the anti-DEI programme. This guy can count himself unlucky to be fired for it.
    What it does show is that there's still a scintilla of understanding of decency in their project; of identifying where the line is they don't want to cross for appearance's sake.

    Personally, I'm slightly surprised their response wasn't just "Yes. And?"
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,353
    tbf to Musk, it may be he is commenting on the number of different states paying for BBC Media Action.

    Although that requires conflating what is basically a charity with the BBC itself.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    edited February 7
    Scott_xP said:

    MattW said:

    dixiedean said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Would have thought "massive racist" would have been essential on the person spec.
    That's interesting - I think he's one of the Musk Bros in short trousers who connected a commercial server to the USA's financial systems in violation of law, and stole the database.

    If he's out, does that mean he has been cast loose and could potentially be indicted. Chump has a record of cutting his fellow-criminals lose from previous cases when they were no longer any use to him.
    He pardoned 1500 Jan 6 supporters. Trump only tends to cut people loose if they turn against him, or he believes they have.

    In this case, the kid must know plenty. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a pardon-and-shut-up offer available.
    IIRC accessing the tax records of a US citizen is a civil offense and therefore can't be pardoned. $1000 per...
    The president can grant pardons for any "Offences against the United States". I'd be surprised if it wasn't covered.

    And whether Trump can or can't constitutionally pardon someone, I'd absolutely expect him to claim he can, try it on, and dare someone to come against him - or hold out a worthless offer if even he knew it wasn't on but thought he could bluff the person he was selling it to.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,468
    edited February 7

    At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    Well I haven't given up on the conservatives not least because we are a long way from getting the chance to change the government

    I expect Reform to continue making gains certainly at the expense of Labour and in this volatile world the next election is anyone's guess
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,117
    .
    Fishing said:

    Nigelb said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    My point was pretty clearly about its significance as projection of foreign policy, compared with its humanitarian benefits.

    The latter's significance to its recipients vastly outweighs Topping's "projection of power".
    And when the US wants to do that, it provides aid through other means - as, for example, military assistance to Israel, or S Korea.

    Soft power as a primary US foreign policy tool would be exemplified by something like the Marshall Plan. But even that wasn't really about imperialism, but an alternative to it. The US could have chose to occupy Japan indefinitely after WWII, and kept it in economic subjugation (or destroy Germany as a manufacturing power). It chose rather (after several years' debate) to finance the rebuilding of their industrial economies in order to create regional allies.
    As a matter of definition, economic policies, like the Marshall Plan, are generally considered hard power, not soft, which is more about subtle, indirect influence. A good example of soft power is Radio Free Europe, which influenced rather than commanded.

    As a matter of fact, the US did not "finance the rebuilding of their industrial economies" - 85-90% of the investment in European industry in the five years of the Marshall Plan was domestically generated. The plan's direct influence has been vastly overstated, and what influence it had came mostly from the framework of rules and regulations that the Americans insist that recipient countries establish as a condition of the aid (moving towards freer trade, currency convertibility, management and productivity advice from the ECA, etc), at a time when many were tempted by extreme socialism or Communism.
    Without hard currency - ie the U.S. dollar, at the time - the domestic investment would have been far more difficult, or in the case of Japan, impossible. That is really the point; the ROI on US aid for both donor and recipients was enormous.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,449
    Average Reform vote for council by-elections they have chosen to contest in 2025 (11 contests in total) = 23.1%
  • At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    Drama Queens. For every disaster in the poll or a Reform gain, there is a quiet Con lead or Con gain. I know you think it's in your interest to ramp it up, but those of a sensible disposition, tend to keep calm and rational. It is less than 48 hours since this:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    CON: 26% (+2)
    LAB: 24% (-1)
    RFM: 24% (-1)
    LDM: 13% (=)
    GRN: 6% (-1)
    SNP: 3% (+1)

    Via
    @Moreincommon_
    , 31 Jan - 3 Feb.
    Changes w/ 24 - 27 Jan.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,946

    At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    The challenge is significant. It’s really hard to see today how Reform will not be a major focus of the next election campaign. This suits Farage perfectly, especially if it is a ‘stop Farage’ campaign. The Tories would be crushed if the y keep their Reform lite position.

    Somehow Badenoch needs to engineer the slow demise of Farage, so that come the next election Reform are a damp squib. The retirement of a failed Trump might help, but they are going to need some wins and clear blue water.

  • eekeek Posts: 29,138
    edited February 7
    Sandpit said:
    The shareholders shouldn’t be trying to extract £790m from the £1.5bn being borrowed while others charge £210m for facilitating the early repayment of debt

    I can see the court rejecting the deal for being a con while also complaining about the amount of information they tried to hide from the court
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,353
    Regulator makes ‘unpredecented’ blunder in legal battle over UK lottery
    Gambling Commission accidentally hands over thousands of sensitive documents to Richard Desmond’s lawyers

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/feb/07/gambling-commission-regulator-richard-desmond-national-lottery

    Britain is still broken and the Gambling Commission is still not fit for purpose.

    This line is classic – The [Gambling Commission] wants the court to order the return of some of the documents but is understood to be unsure exactly which files were handed over in error and has been trying to figure this out since before Christmas.
  • Pro_Rata said:

    Average Reform vote for council by-elections they have chosen to contest in 2025 (11 contests in total) = 23.1%

    Last night's locals

    Labour. 23.0% -15.1%
    Conservative. 25.7% +1%
    Reform. 25.3% + 24.7%
    Lib Dems. 19.6% + 2.8%
    Greens. 5.2% -5.7%
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,353
    kamski said:

    a

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    Is your point that you think it's "absolutely stark raving mad" to criticise cutting off aid from one day to the next?
    Either you are a huge fan of the US's (multi-dimensional) force projection around the globe or you are not.

    If you are, then don't complain when they engage in force projection around the globe. If you are not, then don't complain when they reduce force projection around the globe.

    Your first sentence is wrong. Ergo, your conclusion is wrong.
    What is wrong about it.
    One can have a more nuanced position in the US’s global influence.
    translation: I want the US to do exactly what I think it should do and not do what I don't think it should do.

    I mean yes, that's pretty nuanced, but also unrealistic, dontcha think?
    So we've moved from 'absolutely stark raving mad' to 'unrealistic' in a couple of posts. I suppose it's progress...
    I suppose understanding the subtleties of rhetoric aren't your strong point. It's stark raving mad to expect US foreign policy to accord to "your" precise view of the world.
    1. It's valid to be in against US humanitarian aid being cut off *even if that aid is entirely in the service of promoting US foreign policy goals*, while at the same time being against the US illegally invading other countries. I don't know if you are pretending to think that there is some contradiction, or what, as this seems very obvious and simple to understand.
    2. You haven't given a single example of a stark raving mad post from the previous thread, so it's impossible to know what you are talking about.

    I haven't read every post, but I saw posts implying it's a bad thing if people are losing life saving treatment from one day to the next, posts saying Marco Rubio was lying when he said this wouldn't happen, and posts saying it's not in America's interest for this to happen. So where were the absolutely stark raving mad posts oh master of the subtleties of rhetoric?
    It is stark raving mad to try to cherry pick the foreign policy of any country in particular Trump America. Of course we like bits and bobs of any country's policies. But this has a strategic element.

    USAID has, to quote the wiki scholar article, "served as a key institutional site for the promotion of US interests abroad". People are now upset that they are reining back their operations (or at least have announced something to that effect).

    So not liking US cultural imperialism, and at the same time moaning about the restriction of a key tool which was designed to promote US interests abroad is stark raving mad.

    Your welcome.
    I can only conclude that you are stupid AND dishonest. You're welcome.
    Well all your conclusions on this topic so far have been spectacularly misguided and almost wilfully ignorant so I will sleep easy tonight with your assessment.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 18,049
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic, Reform aren't going to win anything (you heard it here first). They are the descendants of fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists and that's not how we roll in this country.

    It wasn't how we rolled (although there's enough history of support for the radical right - and indeed, at times, the radical left - to show there's often been at times a significant undercurrent of support there).

    But to say that of now is to deliberately deny reality.

    Reform are just about leading in the polls. At the very least they're in something of a three-way tie. FON might have house effects that help Reform but all records will be outliers of some nature. Their 29% for Reform published yesterday is not only the highest ever UKIP/BxP/RefUK poll share but also the highest for any party in the last 16 national polls, the joint highest for any party in a poll conducted this year, the highest share for any right-of-centre party since November, and the highest share for any party other than Con/Lab since before the 2010 general election.

    And it's not just polls. Local by-elections are always a bit scattergun in what they throw up, and not always representative given local factors (which should even out over time), and disproportionate attention given them by parties (which shouldn't - but should actually work against Reform), but of yesterday's six seats up for grabs, admittedly in a relatively Reform-friendly bunch, Reform won three and finished a strong second in the other two they contested (failing to stand a candidate in the sixth). Yes, these are low-turnout elections but there's loads of evidence that they do tend to be broadly representative.

    All the data from many other similar countries, and from what's going on now in our own, point to the conclusion that Reform should absolutely be taken seriously as potential candidates to lead the next government, and that forming it outright is not out of the question.
    Do we have the makings of a wager? What odds do you suggest.
    Not really. Lots of moving parts and I'd need to think it through more thoroughly to make an offer. That said, the odds on most seats are easily commercially available so there's no incentive for one or the other of us to offer or accept less favourable terms.

    FWIW, I think the 5/2 from Ladbrokes on Reform most seats is ballpark but probably slightly generous. It's probably quite a steep slope for them to get up to 326 though: they won't get much out of Scotland, for example. I can't see odds for an outright win (oddschecker doesn't have the market but I've not checked the individual sites) but I wouldn't be backing south of 6/1. On the other hand, I'm not interested in laying a 17% return over four years with significant risk.
    Fair enough. I said Reform "aren't going to win anything". I have no doubt that they will win some seats. But they aren't going to win the next GE so we seem to be in agreement.
    Depends what you mean. I don't accept "aren't going to win", which implies a negligible chance. "Probably won't win most seats" and "are unlikely to win outright" I would agree with.
    They aren't going to win. They have a negligible chance of winning most seats or outright.

    We are a betting site, after all, so let me know how you would like to reflect your views.
    To be honest, I'm not interested in making a bet that might take four years to come in, over a website with someone I can't identify. There's no sufficient guarantee that you, I or pbc will be around then.

    FWIW, my advice to you, in terms of how best to get a return on your thinking, would be to go to a major bookies and ask for odds on Reform winning 1-10 seats - or whatever your favoured range/s is/are. Zero seats won't be of any value to you as the odds are quite low, presumably reflecting the chance that Reform might not exist by 2028/9.

    Your thinking is out-of-line with the market so if you are right then the odds will provide a decent odds-against return.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,436
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Battlebus said:

    Leon said:

    So the really big news of the day is that I've extended nm stay at this hotel by ten days, but they've offered me a new room with a slightly larger balcony, albeit with a less buzzy view of the sois

    What to do?

    Later on today I face another cruel dilemma when I have to decide between eating fresh watermelon or mango as I read THE RINGS OF SATURN (probably on the balcony)

    Don't you have a home to go to?
    Yeah, I do, but it's in London where it is

    <<< checks app >>>

    5C, grey, and windy, with cold rain expected

    Here in Klong Theoi, Bangkok, it is

    33C, with a pure blue sky, soft breeze, and a prospect of fresh watermelon, or mango, around 7pm
    Damn you, I’ve only got 26ºC today, and it’s a bit cloudy outside.

    But hey, it’s almost G&T o’clock.
    I would definitely prefer 26C to 33C.

    I find anything above 30c hard work. Now granted air con works but I do prefer to be outside if I can
    27-9C is about my ideal, I agree that over 30C is unnecessary. However it is stlll vastly preferable to 5C, grey, dank, dark, windy

    The "advantage" of a sunny 33C day is that you go indoors for the peak heat, and a siesta, in the arvo. And then as the sun and the heat ebb away there is this marvellous period, about 40 mins before sunset, when the world comes to life again. The hookers get off the Skytrain in their hotpants, the fresh melon mongers appear under the flickering lamps, the first gin and tonics are served by the sugar palms of Det 5, and all is right with the world, as the tropical moon emerges above the glitter'in skyscrapers
    Coming back to our "coming home" discussions of old, it is to a very large extent, perhaps wholly made "real" only once you have related it to the denizens of PB who are back in the UK. That is your anchor to the world whereby you can relate your current otherwise rootless experiences. People need roots and while London might not be yours, and you don't care anyway, PB certainly is.

    And, of course, we are delighted to fulfil that role. You wouldn't be the only contributor to whom it applies.
    I wouldn't deny it

    The internet is great for this. It allows me to travel the world yet still have several places where I can feel "home" - PB is one, also a few WhatsApp groups, subreddits, Substack, TwiX, etc

    I am not sure my itinerant life would be tolerable without it. Indeed, likely not

    It wasn't a criticism or snipe. Just an observation.
    And perceptive

    People think Working From Home (or Bangkok) is all about Zooms and Teams, but a neglected part of it is the way the Net allows anyone to “take your home country with you” - socially as well as professionally

    I have three good friends here in Bangers, and others pass through, and I have some acquaintances, and a diverting nightlife. But that probably wouldn’t be enough to alleviate boredom/loneliness if I didn’t also have the internet
  • HYUFD said:

    It is hard to see Reform agreeing to any pact with the Conservatives which does not see them standing candidates in enough seats to potentially win most seats.

    If Labour or the Conservatives win most seats then Starmer or Badenoch not Farage would almost certainly end up PM anyway

    If there is any kind of pact, Badenoch will not be Tory leader.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,940

    At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    They don't.

    At some level, like Baron Max in Cabaret, the centre right still thinks they can exploit the hard right. Farage can sweep away the ghastly lefties and then leave the grownups in charge.

    That does have to end the way that particular movie ended, but it rarely ends well.

    But the soft right does have dismal track record of assuming "we can control them" long after it's become pretty clear that isn't going to happen.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,353
    edited February 7
    ill-judged joke deleted
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,434
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    They can see what’s actually important once the $60bn swamp has been drained. It’s probably a few hundred million of actual direct foreign aid. Right now they can’t see the wood for the trees.
    It's too late.

    They couldn't (even if they wanted to, which they didn't) un-destroy the things they have already destroyed - such as all the clinical trials they instructed to be stopped mid-stream denying the volunteers the care they need for the duration in case eg of complications as a result of the experimental medicines.

    This is on a walking into an ICU and unplugging all the machines level of vandalism, then thinking you can turn the dead patients back on after they have expired.

    Just the clinical trials cancellations are in violation of all the principles and standards of medical ethics. They will never be trusted again, and have put a captive bullet into their soft power.
    "Maybe cutting that project was a mistake, but it's too late now..."
    I posted an article earlier that outlines what they have done, and how it impacts people taking part in clinical trials which the US had agreed to fund throughout. The action by Rubio, Trump & co is psychopathic. Which is of course how Trump has always rolled.

    They went so far as to instruct medical teams doing clinical trials not to do any more work, which left patients with medical devices installed which staff were instructed not to remove, or having treatment stopped half way through which leaves risks of pathogens developing immunity far more likely. One was a trial with a inoculation related to a standard aids treatment, which places the standard treatment at risk of having immunity develop when the trial was stopped in its tracks.

    https://archive.is/20250206231120/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/06/health/usaid-clinical-trials-funding-trump.html
    Some of those people are going to actually die. But Trump hates teh tranz, so that's OK. People may remember the science-fiction series "V" from the 1980's, where the alien invaders stigmatised science and scientists as a means of enabling alien control. Trump's doing the same now. He really is a bad man.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,911
    Dura_Ace said:

    The other factor militating against betting on Reform is that Farage looks fucking old for 61 lately so a health event can't be ruled out before the next GE. The bill will come due for the thousands of Silk Cut consumed eventually.

    Silk Cut is for wimps. It's not proper smoking. Guy's a fraud.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,924
    Ref 1st team 29
    Red Ref apologists 25
    Blue Ref apologists 18
    Yellows 13
    Greens 10

    Find Out Now 5/2/25

    SKS Fans & Reform Apologists please Explain
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,431

    At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    Well I haven't given up on the conservatives not least because we are a long way from getting the chance to change the government

    I expect Reform to continue making gains certainly at the expense of Labour and in this volatile world the next election is anyone's guess
    Agree, but the Tories can't come back without a renewed trust from voters in grown up politics, finding a quality of leadership from several top people I can't put a name to, a time of looking like a competent government in waiting and clarity about their ideas and plan. Because of Reform (and to some extent the LDs) they can't just rely on being the least worst option.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,941

    At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    They don't.

    At some level, like Baron Max in Cabaret, the centre right still thinks they can exploit the hard right. Farage can sweep away the ghastly lefties and then leave the grownups in charge.

    That does have to end the way that particular movie ended, but it rarely ends well.

    But the soft right does have dismal track record of assuming "we can control them" long after it's become pretty clear that isn't going to happen.
    Kurt von Schleicher?
  • viewcode said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Sandpit said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    fpt

    Bastard Americans throwing their weight around acting like the world's policeman with their cultural, economic, and military imperialism.

    Also fpt

    Bastard Americans withdrawing a key instrument of aforementioned imperialism from the globe when the world needs it most and millions will die as a result.

    The fantastic thing about Trump is that he is sending all the right people absolutely stark raving mad.

    USAID = US imperialism ?

    It’s sent you bonkers, certainly.

    “The right people” ?
    Twat.
    No, it is correct. A large share of governmental aid is used to further the soft power of the donor, so does have the donors national interest at heart. A lot is spent on domestic purchases too such as US grain and rice etc.

    It's the benign and paternalistic end of Imperialism, and one that has now been delivered to rivals such as China.
    The US pre Trump spend a lower portion of GDP (around 0.2%) on overseas aid than almost any developed nation. And more on defence spending.

    Calling it a “key instrument of imperialism” is obvious bollocks.
    I can buy the argument about soft power. I don't buy how eliminating that soft power (rather than perhaps retargeting it better) helps them or us.
    They can see what’s actually important once the $60bn swamp has been drained. It’s probably a few hundred million of actual direct foreign aid. Right now they can’t see the wood for the trees.
    It's too late.

    They couldn't (even if they wanted to, which they didn't) un-destroy the things they have already destroyed - such as all the clinical trials they instructed to be stopped mid-stream denying the volunteers the care they need for the duration in case eg of complications as a result of the experimental medicines.

    This is on a walking into an ICU and unplugging all the machines level of vandalism, then thinking you can turn the dead patients back on after they have expired.

    Just the clinical trials cancellations are in violation of all the principles and standards of medical ethics. They will never be trusted again, and have put a captive bullet into their soft power.
    "Maybe cutting that project was a mistake, but it's too late now..."
    I posted an article earlier that outlines what they have done, and how it impacts people taking part in clinical trials which the US had agreed to fund throughout. The action by Rubio, Trump & co is psychopathic. Which is of course how Trump has always rolled.

    They went so far as to instruct medical teams doing clinical trials not to do any more work, which left patients with medical devices installed which staff were instructed not to remove, or having treatment stopped half way through which leaves risks of pathogens developing immunity far more likely. One was a trial with a inoculation related to a standard aids treatment, which places the standard treatment at risk of having immunity develop when the trial was stopped in its tracks.

    https://archive.is/20250206231120/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/06/health/usaid-clinical-trials-funding-trump.html
    Some of those people are going to actually die. But Trump hates teh tranz, so that's OK. People may remember the science-fiction series "V" from the 1980's, where the alien invaders stigmatised science and scientists as a means of enabling alien control. Trump's doing the same now. He really is a bad man.
    He is on a level with Putin and Xi. All bad men. It's hard not to despair, especially when so many appear to be taken in by him.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,021
    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    The other factor militating against betting on Reform is that Farage looks fucking old for 61 lately so a health event can't be ruled out before the next GE. The bill will come due for the thousands of Silk Cut consumed eventually.

    Silk Cut is for wimps. It's not proper smoking. Guy's a fraud.
    Dunno. Never smerked a tab in my life. Apparently Belomors are the final boss of ciggies.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,220
    edited February 7

    Scott_xP said:

    MattW said:

    dixiedean said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Would have thought "massive racist" would have been essential on the person spec.
    That's interesting - I think he's one of the Musk Bros in short trousers who connected a commercial server to the USA's financial systems in violation of law, and stole the database.

    If he's out, does that mean he has been cast loose and could potentially be indicted. Chump has a record of cutting his fellow-criminals lose from previous cases when they were no longer any use to him.
    He pardoned 1500 Jan 6 supporters. Trump only tends to cut people loose if they turn against him, or he believes they have.

    In this case, the kid must know plenty. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a pardon-and-shut-up offer available.
    IIRC accessing the tax records of a US citizen is a civil offense and therefore can't be pardoned. $1000 per...
    The president can grant pardons for any "Offences against the United States". I'd be surprised if it wasn't covered.

    And whether Trump can or can't constitutionally pardon someone, I'd absolutely expect him to claim he can, try it on, and dare someone to come against him - or hold out a worthless offer if even he knew it wasn't on but thought he could bluff the person he was selling it to.
    Federal Charges may be problematic because ultimately that all reports in to Chump's corrupted DoJ, for which Pam Bondi (Putin Apologist) * has now been confirmed as United States Attorney General.

    OTOH there are Civil Charges, State Charges, and potentially Private Prosecutions (Yank version of). Since the records stolen would cover all states, heaven knows what could happen.

    There are also gumming up factors - simply forcing things through the courts will slow Trump down. There's already an Interim Injunction by Agreement (what we would call a Consent Decree) that access to such records is limited to named and security cleared career civil servants, plus read only access to 2 'special employees' (ie Musk's people), one of whom is the one who was just exposed as a irulent racist) whilst a particular judge in one court considers the matter more fully.

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/judge-weigh-block-doge-accessing-treasury-department-records/story?id=118498817

    It's all unpredictable.

    (She also just closed down the task force targeting interference in the US by Russian oligarchs.)
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,431
    kinabalu said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    The other factor militating against betting on Reform is that Farage looks fucking old for 61 lately so a health event can't be ruled out before the next GE. The bill will come due for the thousands of Silk Cut consumed eventually.

    Silk Cut is for wimps. It's not proper smoking. Guy's a fraud.
    He isn't going to smoke Disque Bleu/Gauloises in public is he?
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,741
    edited February 7

    FF43 said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Being massively racist is the not particularly hidden subplot behind the anti-DEI programme. This guy can count himself unlucky to be fired for it.
    What it does show is that there's still a scintilla of understanding of decency in their project; of identifying where the line is they don't want to cross for appearance's sake.

    Personally, I'm slightly surprised their response wasn't just "Yes. And?"
    Even "that well known regime of the 1930s" found it important to manage their public image in the wider world. It is not a mark of decency to recognize that you need to manage your appearance to those who are decent, and still not totally without power.

    ETA: although you did say "understanding of decency"; and yes, that is true. They know full well that what they are doing is not decent.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,648

    Scott_xP said:

    MattW said:

    dixiedean said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Would have thought "massive racist" would have been essential on the person spec.
    That's interesting - I think he's one of the Musk Bros in short trousers who connected a commercial server to the USA's financial systems in violation of law, and stole the database.

    If he's out, does that mean he has been cast loose and could potentially be indicted. Chump has a record of cutting his fellow-criminals lose from previous cases when they were no longer any use to him.
    He pardoned 1500 Jan 6 supporters. Trump only tends to cut people loose if they turn against him, or he believes they have.

    In this case, the kid must know plenty. I'd be surprised if there wasn't a pardon-and-shut-up offer available.
    IIRC accessing the tax records of a US citizen is a civil offense and therefore can't be pardoned. $1000 per...
    The president can grant pardons for any "Offences against the United States". I'd be surprised if it wasn't covered.

    And whether Trump can or can't constitutionally pardon someone, I'd absolutely expect him to claim he can, try it on, and dare someone to come against him - or hold out a worthless offer if even he knew it wasn't on but thought he could bluff the person he was selling it to.
    That's the point. It's not an offence against "The United States". It's an offence against Joe Bloggs, citizen, millions of times
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,021
    Fair play to Macron, for the second time today.

    First three Mirage 2000 planes are in Ukraine, and three more are on the way.

    https://x.com/aidefranceukr/status/1887479022952542282.

    Unlike the F16s, these have air-to-ground capability with the French version of the Storm Shadow missile.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,449
    edited February 7

    Pro_Rata said:

    Average Reform vote for council by-elections they have chosen to contest in 2025 (11 contests in total) = 23.1%

    Last night's locals

    Labour. 23.0% -15.1%
    Conservative. 25.7% +1%
    Reform. 25.3% + 24.7%
    Lib Dems. 19.6% + 2.8%
    Greens. 5.2% -5.7%
    Broadly last night changes were from 2023 or 2024, so we're looking at Labour dropping from an NEV of 35 into the very low 20s, Con steady on an NEV of around 26, Reform low to mid 20s NEV, and LDs staying in the high teens.

    For this year's locals, where the Tories are defending 1000 seats on an NEV of 36, and Labour defending 300 on an NEV of 29, it's going to be far more brutal on the Tories. This is because Labour are challengers in around 80% of the seats, so their numerical losses from the small numbers of defences could be mitigated by the very odd sneaky, surprise gain.

    For the Tories, 70% of the seats are defences, so more opportunity for numerical losses and fewer for gains.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,587
    Rachel Reeves has the honour of a mention in Popbitch. Apparently she asked for the service charge to be removed from a £300 restaurant bill in Leeds.

    https://x.com/joshbythesea/status/1887804341760712836
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,604
    Israel to help Gazans who want to voluntarily re-settle in Puntland in Somalia.

    I wonder how well this will go down. With our resident Likudniks I am sure it will be warmly welcomed.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/israel-considers-sending-gazans-to-puntland-and-the-somalian-state-could-be-open-to-it/ar-AA1yy3GZ?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=4c082fbc278440eae61720ec98e12ce7&ei=10
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,619

    FF43 said:

    In entirely unsurprising news, one of Squealer's puppies/ Musk's teenage DOGE boys has turned out to be a massive racist...

    https://www.npr.org/2025/02/06/nx-s1-5289337/elon-musk-doge-treasury

    Being massively racist is the not particularly hidden subplot behind the anti-DEI programme. This guy can count himself unlucky to be fired for it.
    IMV many of the anti-DEI types tend to be rather racist anyway; or at least, as we see on here, blind to racism. It's almost as though they require some DEI training... ;)
    I think people can have specific - and good - objections to specific DEI programmes. I challenge why people would be opposed to diversity, equity and inclusion in principle. Why wouldn't you want to do it better?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,613
    edited February 7
    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Average Reform vote for council by-elections they have chosen to contest in 2025 (11 contests in total) = 23.1%

    Last night's locals

    Labour. 23.0% -15.1%
    Conservative. 25.7% +1%
    Reform. 25.3% + 24.7%
    Lib Dems. 19.6% + 2.8%
    Greens. 5.2% -5.7%
    Broadly last night changes were from 2023 or 2024, so we're looking at Labour dropping from an NEV of 35 into the very low 20s, Con steady on an NEV of around 26, Reform low to mid 20s NEV, and LDs staying in the high teens.

    For this year's locals, where the Tories are defending 1000 seats on an NEV of 36, and Labour defending 300 on an NEV of 29, it's going to be far more brutal on the Tories. This is because Labour are challengers in around 80% of the seats, so their numerical losses from the small numbers of defences could be mitigated by the very odd sneaky, surprise gain.

    For the Tories, 70% of the seats are defences, so more opportunity for numerical losses and fewer for gains.
    Just as well for Kemi then half the county council elections have been cancelled this year and then by 2027 half the county councils and district councils will be scrapped and replaced by unitaries on new boundaries
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,946
    This morning in Romania via my son. Shows the reach of the Orange One.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,436
    Taz said:

    Israel to help Gazans who want to voluntarily re-settle in Puntland in Somalia.

    I wonder how well this will go down. With our resident Likudniks I am sure it will be warmly welcomed.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/israel-considers-sending-gazans-to-puntland-and-the-somalian-state-could-be-open-to-it/ar-AA1yy3GZ?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=4c082fbc278440eae61720ec98e12ce7&ei=10

    Looks suitably empty? And they seem to be welcoming the Palestinians, so everyone’s a winner
  • Ban this sick filth or is ban these to save our kids?



  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,613

    Pro_Rata said:

    Average Reform vote for council by-elections they have chosen to contest in 2025 (11 contests in total) = 23.1%

    Last night's locals

    Labour. 23.0% -15.1%
    Conservative. 25.7% +1%
    Reform. 25.3% + 24.7%
    Lib Dems. 19.6% + 2.8%
    Greens. 5.2% -5.7%
    Looks more like MoreinCommon than FindOutNow then when actual votes are cast
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,648
    FF43 said:

    I challenge why people would be opposed to diversity, equity and inclusion in principle. Why wouldn't you want to do it better?

    The people who are opposed to it don't believe it is "better".
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,604

    At which point do the remaining bastion of true-Blue Tories admit publicly they're in trouble? The levels of hopium on display are truly gargantuan. Reform have the momentum, the donors, the public interest and the leader that voters like. Badenoch isn't going to turn the ship around, and the alternative made children cry...

    They don't.

    At some level, like Baron Max in Cabaret, the centre right still thinks they can exploit the hard right. Farage can sweep away the ghastly lefties and then leave the grownups in charge.

    That does have to end the way that particular movie ended, but it rarely ends well.

    But the soft right does have dismal track record of assuming "we can control them" long after it's become pretty clear that isn't going to happen.
    Ironic this is being brought up given we have been here before. The 1987 election with the Spitting Image sketch at the end of its election special. Biting satire/political commentary at a time when it is something we did well rather.

    Three years later Thatcher was history
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,449
    HYUFD said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    Average Reform vote for council by-elections they have chosen to contest in 2025 (11 contests in total) = 23.1%

    Last night's locals

    Labour. 23.0% -15.1%
    Conservative. 25.7% +1%
    Reform. 25.3% + 24.7%
    Lib Dems. 19.6% + 2.8%
    Greens. 5.2% -5.7%
    Broadly last night changes were from 2023 or 2024, so we're looking at Labour dropping from an NEV of 35 into the very low 20s, Con steady on an NEV of around 26, Reform low to mid 20s NEV, and LDs staying in the high teens.

    For this year's locals, where the Tories are defending 1000 seats on an NEV of 36, and Labour defending 300 on an NEV of 29, it's going to be far more brutal on the Tories. This is because Labour are challengers in around 80% of the seats, so their numerical losses from the small numbers of defences could be mitigated by the very odd sneaky, surprise gain.

    For the Tories, 70% of the seats are defences, so more opportunity for numerical losses and fewer for gains.
    Just as well for Kemi then half the county council elections have been cancelled this year and then by 2027 half the county councils and district councils will be scrapped and replaced by unitaries on new boundaries
    There's still plenty left. The cancellations reduced Tory defences from around 1400 to 1050, Labour defences from around 370 to 300.

    So, in terms of seats around 75% of the expected elections going ahead.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,398
    edited February 7

    a

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:
    The shareholders shouldn’t be trying to extract £790m from the £1.5bn being borrowed while others charge £210m for facilitating the early repayment of debt

    I can see the court rejecting the deal for being a con while also complaining about the amount of information they tried to hide from the court
    Can anyone tell me why the following is a bad idea -

    1) Let Thames Water go bust.
    2) Shareholders and bondholders get wiped out (partially?)
    3) The government backs the bills of suppliers, so the network of suppliers is protected and they are paid on time.
    4) Without the debt mountain, the company is extremely profitable. It can easily repay the government for (3)
    I thought the justification for capitalist investors' high returns and low taxation thereof, CGT below the level fo income tax, dividends ditto, was the risk taking in the first place? So what have they to complain about?

    I'm reminded of a Steve Bell cartoon decades ago - at the time of some City scandal. I forget the details, so don't want to name the name I dimly recollect, but basically the investors (who were, one assumes, all grown ups) were demanding that they be repaid - perhaps [edit] at public expense. Mr Bell's response was to have his penguins attend the Derby, troop up to the bookie, put their houses on a horse that would have been slower than the one used in the Great Escape, with the obvious results, and then demand to be paid their winnings as if it had come first.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,436
    Fuck me. It gets worse

    “Sir Keir Starmer’s “national security” justification for handing over the Chagos islands was proposed by one of his closest friends, who represented Mauritius in a case against the UK”

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/07/keir-starmer-friend-chagos-national-security-claims/
This discussion has been closed.