Howdy, Stranger!

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

What Brits think about the Big Mac eating surrender monkey's plans for Ukraine politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,318
edited February 14 in General
What Brits think about the Big Mac eating surrender monkey's plans for Ukraine – politicalbetting.com

Do you think a peace treaty negotiated between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on the Ukraine conflict would be better for Ukraine or better for Russia?Better for Russia than Ukraine: 51%More of a compromise for both sides: 23%Better for Ukraine than Russia: 5%yougov.co.uk/topics/polit…

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,458
    edited February 14
    Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,121
    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,168
    FPT: Did the Guardian intend that double "stunned" meaning? (Whether or not they did, it's still funny.)
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,632
    edited February 14
    Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.

    "It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
    The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,994
    edited February 14
    eek said:

    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night

    I am back Monday evening.

    But I’ve got some prepared threads ready to be deployed.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,563
    rcs1000 said:

    Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.

    How’s your line in double entendres and innuendo, Robert ?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,674

    eek said:

    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night

    I am back Monday evening.

    But I’ve got some prepared threads ready to be deployed.
    He'll have withdrawn them by then.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,563

    eek said:

    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night

    I am back Monday evening.

    But I’ve got some prepared threads ready to be deployed.
    So will there be a political scalp or won’t there be while you’re off watching Radiohead and eating Hawaiian Pizzas ?
  • Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,977
    Reform giving in to Russia.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417

    FPT: Did the Guardian intend that double "stunned" meaning? (Whether or not they did, it's still funny.)

    No it was me mistranscribing because I was simultaneously watching “Mussolini”’ reading news,
    sending emails and posting on here

  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,135
    edited February 14
    Andy_JS said:

    Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.

    "It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
    The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe

    I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.

    I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.

    But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
  • Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)

    If the police made that assertion at the Licencing Hearing then it needs to be appealed right away. They had deliberately inverted the rule. Quite frankly any officer making that assertion and his Line Manager need to be sacked. But then that is Keir Starmer's UK, Cart, Horse arseways around
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,722
    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645
    eek said:

    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night

    Or Rachel Reeves is fired. Here's hoping.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,999
    edited February 14

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.

    My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.

    He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
    I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.

    It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.

    Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
    So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?

    If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
    It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
    Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
    'Supporting' is not just analysis.
    Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:

    “I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory

    OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
    The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.

    If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
    Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).

    But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
    Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...
    As Topping says so what

    They have lost and will be giving up land

    They will be repaying America via mineral rights.

    Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945

    As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.

    It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.

    Zelensky will be fine mind
    How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?

    Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,417
    My picture ration

    Valentine’s Day, evening, Bangkok, tonight



    What makes this temporary collection of roses, perfumes, love hearts, pink cuddly toys with I LOVE YOU embroidery is that it is right outside Nana Plaza, Bangkok’s largest complex of brothels
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,563
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.

    How’s your line in double entendres and innuendo, Robert ?
    My wife asked for a double entendre. So I gave her one.
    Boom boom. The site is clearly in capable hands while he’s away.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,372
    edited February 14

    Andy_JS said:

    Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.

    "It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
    The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe

    I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.

    I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.

    But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
    You mean, not like the newspapers and pols went to town on Lucy Letby when she was convicted (and during the trial)? You're not allowed to deploy like political pressure in return?

    I must say I don't know what the answer is to that - or whether she really is innocent - but I've read enough about courts in general and this case in particular to get rather uncomfortable about any sort of trial with elaborate stats and no defence.

    Did she have legal aid? In which case, no money for decent defence witnesses.

    But the media have something to be blamed for, as it appears no specialists wanted to get the pediatrician/paedo treatment fromt he media (and, presumablyt, the local vigilantes).

    https://www.bmj.com/content/388/bmj.r300
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.

    How’s your line in double entendres and innuendo, Robert ?
    My wife asked for a double entendre. So I gave her one.
    Boom boom. The site is clearly in capable hands while he’s away.
    So is his wife
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.

    My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.

    He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
    I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.

    It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.

    Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
    So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?

    If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
    It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
    Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
    'Supporting' is not just analysis.
    Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:

    “I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory

    OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
    The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.

    If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
    Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).

    But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
    Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...
    As Topping says so what

    They have lost and will be giving up land

    They will be repaying America via mineral rights.

    Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945

    As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.

    It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.

    Zelensky will be fine mind
    How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?

    Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
    Corbyistas are comfortable with murderous Russian fascists because they are anti-West and are therefore to be cheered on.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 12,711
    FPT…

    Andy_JS said:

    JohnO said:

    The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.

    Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
    The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
    Then they will never form a majority government.
    Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
    Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
    I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.

    To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
    Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.

    There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.

    The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
    It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,328
    fpt
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    EPG said:

    Leon said:

    SUPERB speech by Vance in Munich


    The Guardian says “he left the room stunned”

    He's ordering Europe to let neo-Nazis into government, so of course you'd like him.
    Eia eia alala!

    Many thanks to @Theuniondivvie for suggesting Sky Atlantic’s Mussolini. Unusual but good. And timely
    Speaking of which, I had occasion yesterday to read the Speccie from cover to cover. I mean I can't argue with the circulation stats or perhaps even the readership demographic but god it was turgid and nothing seems to have changed since years ago. The same bitter, I miss the 1950s when people knew their place article by Charles Moore at the front, a why oh why from the otherwise excellent Douglas Murray, and in general still a retail offer to retired colonels and parish councillors.

    I didn't get the young, bright, snappy, relevant element that is bringing droves of young people to the mag.
    You need to read the online edition. Or listen to the podcasts. Or watch spectator tv. Or check its other digital offerings

    The actual magazine is aimed specifically at the older and ageing readership that still reads paper magazines
    Ah that makes perfect sense.

    I also read Private Eye and was underwhelmed, not taking away their campaigns which are or can be I know super-effective.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554
    EPG said:

    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.

    I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.

    Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,662

    Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)

    If the police made that assertion at the Licencing Hearing then it needs to be appealed right away. They had deliberately inverted the rule. Quite frankly any officer making that assertion and his Line Manager need to be sacked. But then that is Keir Starmer's UK, Cart, Horse arseways around
    Yes, the Met were a paragon of virtue and good sense before Starmer took over.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 12,711
    The polling in the header demonstrates (again) that the split in politics is between populists (Reform UK) and everyone else.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,328
    rcs1000 said:

    Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)

    Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.
    Amen brother.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 12,711
    rcs1000 said:

    Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)

    Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.
    Isn’t Radiohead in a way just a modern form of jazz?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,795
    edited February 14

    EPG said:

    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.

    I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.

    Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
    You haven’t won the culture war just because you say you have. We’ll see what the lay of the land is after Trump has coated us all in the brown stuff. Trump won by only a few % remember.

    And a No Deal Hard Brexit didn’t happen and thank god for that.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,121

    eek said:

    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night

    Or Rachel Reeves is fired. Here's hoping.
    I’m perplexed by the idea that anyone things getting rid of her would change anything - all she’s doing is select from options given by the treasury - that needs to be fixed
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,167
    rcs1000 said:

    Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)

    Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.
    What's wrong with jazz?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,633
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.

    How’s your line in double entendres and innuendo, Robert ?
    My wife asked for a double entendre. So I gave her one.
    Surely you gave her two...
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,662

    EPG said:

    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.

    I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.

    Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
    Comprehensively? Or maybe you meant comprehensibly? Could be both, I guess.
  • One of those polls where Reform voters are in a massively different place to Conservative voters, who are actually pretty close to LibLab opinion.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,452
    Andy_JS said:

    Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.

    "It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
    The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe

    The economist always takes the midwit intelligentsia view, so I guess “Letby’s conviction is unsafe” is now UK mainstream opinion in the London dinner party set.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,167

    The polling in the header demonstrates (again) that the split in politics is between populists (Reform UK) and everyone else.

    Or, to put it another way, not all (or even most) Reform voters are Putin sympathisers, but it is the Putin sympathisers' party of choice. I wonder why that is?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645
    eek said:

    eek said:

    I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.

    That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night

    Or Rachel Reeves is fired. Here's hoping.
    I’m perplexed by the idea that anyone things getting rid of her would change anything - all she’s doing is select from options given by the treasury - that needs to be fixed
    She is a liar and a lightweight. There needs to be consequences for the former if not for the latter. The BBC suggests that she is also possibly an expenses fraudster. Someone needs to find out if/why her previous employer agreed a compromise agreement with her and what else was covered up. When someone lies on their CV (and whatever anyone says they were lies) it nearly always goes with a dishonest track record. It is why lying on a CV is considered gross misconduct by most employers.

    She is fundamentally not suitable to hold the position she is in, in the same way as Boris Johnson was unsuitable to be PM.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,555
    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645
    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,795
    edited February 14
    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Your last paragraph isn’t right. Yes some, maybe even up to 40% of Reform voters are in the Trump column, but that leaves a majority not, even within Reform.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595
    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Or very much in the "Sovereignty for us, not for other people!" column.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,768

    EPG said:

    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.

    I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.

    Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
    Comprehensively? Or maybe you meant comprehensibly? Could be both, I guess.
    Dunno, diffcult to comprehend that the US electorate voted the creature in twice (or 3 times if you believe the creature).
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,554

    EPG said:

    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.

    I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.

    Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
    Comprehensively? Or maybe you meant comprehensibly? Could be both, I guess.
    Yes it's a typo. :blush:
  • pigeon said:

    The polling in the header demonstrates (again) that the split in politics is between populists (Reform UK) and everyone else.

    Or, to put it another way, not all (or even most) Reform voters are Putin sympathisers, but it is the Putin sympathisers' party of choice. I wonder why that is?
    Good (and important) question. The hypothesis I'd like to test is that it's an unhealthy media diet making their brains rot.

    In which case, the UK isn't totally safe, but is in a safer place than the USA.
  • Reform voters tend to be low information voters. They don't know much about the detail of how the world works and they don't care - they just want things to be good for them and their own.

    TBH there's something refreshing about that - if we're honest with ourselves many of us think we are more knowledgeable about some stuff than we actually are. Good at saying things that are plausible even if they aren't actual.

    People expressing a view about how a Trump/Putin deal will be good for Putin. Perhaps. Perhaps not. We have no detail about what the deal might be. Not even any broad outlines of it. So all we're doing is letting our prejudices run wild and imagine what a deal might look like from two people we don't have a good opinion of. We are low information on this subject, no different to anyone else.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,104

    Andy_JS said:

    Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.

    "It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
    The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe

    I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.

    I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.

    But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
    There was an article in Guardian (yes, I know) earlier this week by Neena Modi, Professor of Neonatal medicine at Imperial College and past president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, in which she sets out her concern, notably that Countess of Chester wasn't equipped or staffed to deal with really seriously ill babies, and some at least of these children had been identified as such before their mothers went into labour.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,168
    Off topic, but inportant: How serious is the current flu outbreak? This serious:

    "Influenza levels in the United States are the highest they’ve been in 15 years as winter weather persists and the second wave of the virus causes more and more infections, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

    The most recent CDC Weekly U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report shows that 7.8% of visits to a healthcare provider were for respiratory illness, the worst since the swine flu pandemic in late 2009. According to the report, most flu statistics in the U.S. are trending up, including the positive flu infections (31.6%), the patients admitted to hospitals with the flu this week (48,661), and the number of deaths attributed to the flu this week (2%)."
    source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/02/11/flu-influenza-cases-increase-2025-symptoms-cdc/78412536007/

    Fortunately we now have an HHS secretary — and president — who are uniquely qualified to respond to this outbreak. /sarc
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,156

    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
    Not forgetting racist tendencies
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068
    rcs1000 said:

    Nice.

    Sam Dumitriu
    @Sam_Dumitriu
    London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.

    (Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)

    Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.
    Miles Davis, in particular ?
  • glwglw Posts: 10,157
    edited February 14

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.

    I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,560
    Leon said:

    My picture ration

    Valentine’s Day, evening, Bangkok, tonight



    What makes this temporary collection of roses, perfumes, love hearts, pink cuddly toys with I LOVE YOU embroidery is that it is right outside Nana Plaza, Bangkok’s largest complex of brothels

    Does Nana Plaza specialise in brothels for Wayne Rooney?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,560

    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
    It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.

    The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595
    glw said:

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.

    I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.
    The world is complex, and the majority of problems are hard to solve. It is therefore comforting when someone comes along with an easy 'solution' to a complex problem, especially if you are not an expert in that problem.

    Even more so, when the solution is: "It's *their* fault, not yours!"
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,493

    Reform voters tend to be low information voters. They don't know much about the detail of how the world works and they don't care - they just want things to be good for them and their own.

    Very true. The mystery is why one of our own who has had such ample opportunities to collect and evaluate such information nevertheless reaches the same political conclusions as someone who has been inside a caravan in Jaywick the whole time…..

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,999

    EPG said:

    This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.

    I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.

    Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
    Trump 2.0 was all about the price of eggs and the price of gas. But man, those rust belt voters are going to be so disappointed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,458

    glw said:

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.

    I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.
    The world is complex, and the majority of problems are hard to solve. It is therefore comforting when someone comes along with an easy 'solution' to a complex problem, especially if you are not an expert in that problem.

    Even more so, when the solution is: "It's *their* fault, not yours!"
    The most seductive words in the English language are "it's not your fault".
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645

    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
    It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.

    The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....
    She certainly wouldn't be rolling over for Putin, and would be giving that orange surrendering twat a good earful too
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,560
    O/T, My Spotify random player has just picked, back-to-back, two of the greatest songs about horse racing ever written:

    Elbow - The Fix followed by The Pogues - Bottle of Smoke.

    (The third being The Galway Farmer by Show of Hands. Go on, treat yourself to a medley - although The Pogues are a bit sweary so may be NSFW...)

    Is there a fourth?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,200
    edited February 14
    rcs1000 said:

    Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.

    I've probably got something nearly finished *. I'm sure there was a poll about factions and frictions in Ref UK :smile: .

    Or JD Vance needs a good fisking.

    * I'm very good at nearly finishing things.
  • glw said:

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.

    I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.
    I woud suggest that in the US where the safety net has vast holes in it, and people are one decision away from absolute destitution, clinging to the hope provided by Trump - however false it might be - is perhaps understandable. In the UK and places like France where the safety net, whilst not comfortable, is at least usable, there is far less excuse.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068
    The overt grift/bribery is on another scale compared with Trump 1.0

    Melania pitched her documentary idea to Bezos over dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Amazon agreed to pay $40M—with more than 70% going to her. And her agent has been trying to sell "sponsorships" for the film—starting at $10M—to CEOs at the inauguration. Buyers would get thanked in the credits and be invited to the premiere...
    https://x.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1890205838201045283
  • HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
    It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.

    The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....
    She certainly wouldn't be rolling over for Putin, and would be giving that orange surrendering twat a good earful too
    The Iron Lady. Going at Ronnie with her handbag. "Our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for almost 40 years" etc.

    Say what you want about her - and everyone does. You knew what she stood for, and she wasn't frit.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,632
    edited February 14
    edit
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 792

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.

    My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.

    He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
    I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.

    It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.

    Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
    So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?

    If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
    It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
    Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
    'Supporting' is not just analysis.
    Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:

    “I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory

    OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
    The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.

    If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
    Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).

    But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
    Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...
    As Topping says so what

    They have lost and will be giving up land

    They will be repaying America via mineral rights.

    Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945

    As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.

    It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.

    Zelensky will be fine mind
    How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?

    Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
    Corbyistas are comfortable with murderous Russian fascists because they are anti-West and are therefore to be cheered on.
    Putin seems to have as many, if not more, supporters from the right. Any "old lefties" who think Putin is a fellow leftie needs to give their head a serious wobble, Russia has been sliding into corrupt autocratic kleptocracy since the end of Gorbachev.

    It's clear that if Putin is appeased then he'll be back for more of Ukraine in a few years because that is what has already happened with the 2014 Crimea invasion.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,157

    The world is complex, and the majority of problems are hard to solve. It is therefore comforting when someone comes along with an easy 'solution' to a complex problem, especially if you are not an expert in that problem.

    Even more so, when the solution is: "It's *their* fault, not yours!"

    People with "easy answers" are the very people we should be most wary of. Even a moderate knowledge of history, or just experience of life, should make the public wary of such people. That grown adults in their later years still fall for this obvious tripe is something I find very hard to understand. My hunch is that most of their supporters know that Trump or Farage are no good, but they are engaging in self-deception, because it allows them to pretend that their worst instincts and views are valid, rather than rubbish they should have rejected or grown out of.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,372
    edited February 14

    Off topic, but inportant: How serious is the current flu outbreak? This serious:

    "Influenza levels in the United States are the highest they’ve been in 15 years as winter weather persists and the second wave of the virus causes more and more infections, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

    The most recent CDC Weekly U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report shows that 7.8% of visits to a healthcare provider were for respiratory illness, the worst since the swine flu pandemic in late 2009. According to the report, most flu statistics in the U.S. are trending up, including the positive flu infections (31.6%), the patients admitted to hospitals with the flu this week (48,661), and the number of deaths attributed to the flu this week (2%)."
    source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/02/11/flu-influenza-cases-increase-2025-symptoms-cdc/78412536007/

    Fortunately we now have an HHS secretary — and president — who are uniquely qualified to respond to this outbreak. /sarc

    Fortunately 'Compared to 2009's high numbers, lab tests across the U.S. suggest cases this year are from the usual seasonal variants of the virus and not a new strain that has spilled over from animals.' [which would include birds] / not sarcastic.

    Not yet anyway.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,952

    One of those polls where Reform voters are in a massively different place to Conservative voters, who are actually pretty close to LibLab opinion.

    Ver interesting. Presumably these are fair-minded Conservatives. They ought not to be in the Tory column.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,068
    edited February 14
    Just correlation, or causation ? :wink:
    https://x.com/s8mb/status/1890417554604040435
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,632
    "In a Corner of Wales, Britain’s Hard-Right Reform U.K. Party Gains Ground

    Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration party is winning over some disillusioned Labour voters by targeting regions that are struggling economically and by campaigning on local issues."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/world/europe/reform-uk-wales-farage.html
  • glwglw Posts: 10,157

    I woud suggest that in the US where the safety net has vast holes in it, and people are one decision away from absolute destitution, clinging to the hope provided by Trump - however false it might be - is perhaps understandable. In the UK and places like France where the safety net, whilst not comfortable, is at least usable, there is far less excuse.

    They have already had a dose of Trump. He didn't make their lives better, they saw that he's a crook, incompetent, and chaotic. How can any rational person think "this time will be different?"

    Now they have the world's richest man making arbitrary cuts to the very programmes intended to help the poorest make ends meet.

    It's like the United States of Chickens elected the Fox again, and this time the Wolf has joined him for dinner.
  • FPT…

    Andy_JS said:

    JohnO said:

    The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.

    Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
    The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
    Then they will never form a majority government.
    Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
    Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
    I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.

    To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
    Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.

    There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.

    The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
    It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?
    Also worth pointing out that at least some of those you mention and some of those like Anna Soubry mentioned by the OP would claim (with some justification) that it was not they but the parties that moved. They held their philosophical and political positions over an extended period of time and the parties moved away from them rather than vice versa.

    The ones I really dislike are the worms like Bercow who moved from one obnoxious extreme to another.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595
    I do wonder if there's a connection between believing/swallowing conspiracy theories and political extremism.

    Certainly, both fascism and communism succeeded in selling a lot of conspiracy theories to the public.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,448
    Dopermean said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.

    My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.

    He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
    I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.

    It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.

    Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
    So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?

    If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
    It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
    Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
    'Supporting' is not just analysis.
    Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:

    “I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory

    OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
    The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.

    If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
    Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).

    But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
    Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...
    As Topping says so what

    They have lost and will be giving up land

    They will be repaying America via mineral rights.

    Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945

    As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.

    It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.

    Zelensky will be fine mind
    How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?

    Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
    Corbyistas are comfortable with murderous Russian fascists because they are anti-West and are therefore to be cheered on.
    Putin seems to have as many, if not more, supporters from the right. Any "old lefties" who think Putin is a fellow leftie needs to give their head a serious wobble, Russia has been sliding into corrupt autocratic kleptocracy since the end of Gorbachev.

    It's clear that if Putin is appeased then he'll be back for more of Ukraine in a few years because that is what has already happened with the 2014 Crimea invasion.
    If Ukraine's position is weak enough without the US that they would indeed be best advised at that point to sue for terms on current lines, then sadly the accelerated mass killing of advancing Russians and the accelerated mass destruction of their remaining infrastructure is by far their best tactic in the intervening weeks.
  • Great new government funded immigration campaign is landing in Albania.

    Ben Gartside @BenGartside
    Scoop: The UK is bigoted, Brexit is bad and housing is too expensive.

    Inside the Government's undisclosed social media campaign to potential Albanian migrants.

    Featuring pictures of flytipping, graffiti and Norwich.

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/uk-bigoted-brexit-bad-government-campaign-scare-migrants-3536102
  • HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
    It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.

    The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....
    She certainly wouldn't be rolling over for Putin, and would be giving that orange surrendering twat a good earful too
    The Iron Lady. Going at Ronnie with her handbag. "Our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for almost 40 years" etc.

    Say what you want about her - and everyone does. You knew what she stood for, and she wasn't frit.
    The Lady is not for turning
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,372
    edited February 14

    FPT…

    Andy_JS said:

    JohnO said:

    The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.

    Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
    The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
    Then they will never form a majority government.
    Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
    Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
    I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.

    To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
    Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.

    There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.

    The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
    It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?
    There was that chap who founded the Northumbria Freedom Party or whatever it was and ended up a ScoTory Unionist I think via Slab (or was it the other way round?). Mind, someone has cleaned up the internet quite well.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,662
    A bold prediction. Reform are peaking too soon. They may still rise a bit over the next year or so, but will then stagnate in the run-up to 2029 GE, and will decline during the heat of an election campaign, ending up with a core vote of around 20% or less as their lack of substance is revealed. Why? Lots of reasons. Tice is an idiot. Their policy offer is incoherent and unaffordable. Immigration will have come down. And Farage's end of the pier show will feel a bit old hat.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,922

    Andy_JS said:

    Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.

    "It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
    The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"

    https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe

    I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.

    I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.

    But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
    You mean Judge Judy and Executioner, Shirley?

    https://youtu.be/aq2u1bmkKUQ?si=k9bQjSPTkVTfTdqM

    Commentators have been declaiming on the innocence or guilt of people on appeal since appeals and newspapers were invented. It's part of the process of open justice.

    There is a long and ugly history of "Don't comment on legal proceedings. Just trust the Law, the Police etc."
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645
    Andy_JS said:

    HYUFD said:

    Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.

    Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.

    Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column

    Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
    You continue to use the F word to describe political positions you don't like that definitely aren't fascist.
    Oh do I? Thank you so much for your insightful analysis, even though it is probably complete bollocks. I am sure there are many that would not describe the populist, nationalist, racist (according to Alan Sked), Putin apologist, Trump enthusiast Nigel Farage as Fascist. And maybe even if he is all those things, maybe, just maybe he is not exactly a goosestepping black shirt fetishist. Maybe his friends Elon Musk and Donald Trump are not really election denying law bending thugs and are really upstanding protectors of democracy.

    If you live in a gullible universe, then Nigel Farage, Elon Musk and Donald Trump are probably upstanding defenders of Liberal Democracy and their buddy Vlad Putin is only looking for a just and lasting peace with Ukraine.

    In my universe, which is wary of wannabe demagogues and apologists for mass murderers of innocents, I like to describe Mr Farage and friends as fascist. Apologies if that offends your gullible sensibilities.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,924
    Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS

    As there was an investigation somebody clearly did

    She is silent on fake dentist appointments
  • Nigelb said:

    The overt grift/bribery is on another scale compared with Trump 1.0

    Melania pitched her documentary idea to Bezos over dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Amazon agreed to pay $40M—with more than 70% going to her. And her agent has been trying to sell "sponsorships" for the film—starting at $10M—to CEOs at the inauguration. Buyers would get thanked in the credits and be invited to the premiere...
    https://x.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1890205838201045283

    These are the values the US shares with Europe, apparently, and which get the Spectator class so excited. I suppose Melania is Slovenian!

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,924

    I do wonder if there's a connection between believing/swallowing conspiracy theories and political extremism.

    Certainly, both fascism and communism succeeded in selling a lot of conspiracy theories to the public.

    Nobody can equal Zionists for believing/swallowing conspiracy theories.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,356
    edited February 14

    Reform voters tend to be low information voters. They don't know much about the detail of how the world works and they don't care - they just want things to be good for them and their own.

    TBH there's something refreshing about that - if we're honest with ourselves many of us think we are more knowledgeable about some stuff than we actually are. Good at saying things that are plausible even if they aren't actual.

    People expressing a view about how a Trump/Putin deal will be good for Putin. Perhaps. Perhaps not. We have no detail about what the deal might be. Not even any broad outlines of it. So all we're doing is letting our prejudices run wild and imagine what a deal might look like from two people we don't have a good opinion of. We are low information on this subject, no different to anyone else.

    You don't need to understand how it currently works however to say it is not working for me. That is why they vote reform. These are people that won't be able to answer how do we make your life better but do understand that the status quo which has already immiserated them is not the answer so they pick one of the two options that aren't status quo because its all they have offered....greens or reform
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,662

    Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS

    As there was an investigation somebody clearly did

    She is silent on fake dentist appointments

    It's outrageous. Fake dentists? Whatever next.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.

    My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.

    He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
    I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.

    It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.

    Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
    So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?

    If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
    It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.
    Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.
    'Supporting' is not just analysis.
    Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:

    “I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory

    OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
    The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.

    If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.

    If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
    Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).

    But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
    Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...
    As Topping says so what

    They have lost and will be giving up land

    They will be repaying America via mineral rights.

    Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945

    As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.

    It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.

    Zelensky will be fine mind
    How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?

    Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.

    The horseshoe theory of politics is among the most compelling there is. The far-left loves Putin because he socks it to the West., The far-right loves him because he socks it to the woke. Both are very happy for the rest of us to sacrifice our democracy, rule of law and freedom of speech to see him win.

    Fascism was popularised as a political concept by Mussolini, who was a socialist/communist/marxist just a few years earlier. This is direct evidence that the seemingly different political philosophies are actually rather appealing to the same sort of person.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,044

    FPT…

    Andy_JS said:

    JohnO said:

    The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.

    Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
    The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
    Then they will never form a majority government.
    Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
    Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
    I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.

    To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
    Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.

    There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.

    The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
    It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?
    Also worth pointing out that at least some of those you mention and some of those like Anna Soubry mentioned by the OP would claim (with some justification) that it was not they but the parties that moved. They held their philosophical and political positions over an extended period of time and the parties moved away from them rather than vice versa.

    The ones I really dislike are the worms like Bercow who moved from one obnoxious extreme to another.
    Bercow simply believes in whatever is expedient, at any particular point in time.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,811
    edited February 14
    glw said:

    I woud suggest that in the US where the safety net has vast holes in it, and people are one decision away from absolute destitution, clinging to the hope provided by Trump - however false it might be - is perhaps understandable. In the UK and places like France where the safety net, whilst not comfortable, is at least usable, there is far less excuse.

    They have already had a dose of Trump. He didn't make their lives better, they saw that he's a crook, incompetent, and chaotic. How can any rational person think "this time will be different?"

    Now they have the world's richest man making arbitrary cuts to the very programmes intended to help the poorest make ends meet.

    It's like the United States of Chickens elected the Fox again, and this time the Wolf has joined him for dinner.
    Did he really make things that much worse for them in his first term. I remember being extremely worried about him becoming President in 2016 and then completely underwhelmed (in a relieved way) by what he actually did in power. Very little of what he and his opponents predicted for his first term came to pass.

    I mean, for those of us watching from the outside and not invested in the result in the same way as the US electorate, it was obvious that he was going to learn his lesson and be more extreme second time around. But too many Americans are still poor and the Democrats chose a candidate who gave no signs at all of actually understanding the problems of the average working or middle class voter.

    When you are not in that position it is easy to criticise their decisions but when you are drowning you will cling to any possible liferaft floating by, even if it turns out to be full of holes.

    This in no way forgives Trump and his cabal, but I do think we are too harsh on the US voters from our nice, relatively well supported, lives in the UK.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,645
    Sean_F said:

    FPT…

    Andy_JS said:

    JohnO said:

    The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.

    Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.
    The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.
    Then they will never form a majority government.
    Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.
    Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?
    I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.

    To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
    Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.

    There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.

    The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
    It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?
    Also worth pointing out that at least some of those you mention and some of those like Anna Soubry mentioned by the OP would claim (with some justification) that it was not they but the parties that moved. They held their philosophical and political positions over an extended period of time and the parties moved away from them rather than vice versa.

    The ones I really dislike are the worms like Bercow who moved from one obnoxious extreme to another.
    Bercow simply believes in whatever is expedient, at any particular point in time.
    Or whatever Mrs Bercow tells him to believe
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,924

    Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS

    As there was an investigation somebody clearly did

    She is silent on fake dentist appointments

    It's outrageous. Fake dentists? Whatever next.
    Well she was followed when she claimed to be going to the dentist.

    She went to a Labour Party meeting

    So indeed fake dentists
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,595

    I do wonder if there's a connection between believing/swallowing conspiracy theories and political extremism.

    Certainly, both fascism and communism succeeded in selling a lot of conspiracy theories to the public.

    Nobody can equal Zionists for believing/swallowing conspiracy theories.
    @Luckyguy1983 gives it a good try... ;)
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,156

    Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS

    As there was an investigation somebody clearly did

    She is silent on fake dentist appointments

    It's outrageous. Fake dentists? Whatever next.
    Well she was followed when she claimed to be going to the dentist.

    She went to a Labour Party meeting

    So indeed fake dentists
    Perhaps the clp chair was a dentist?

    :)
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,099

    O/T, My Spotify random player has just picked, back-to-back, two of the greatest songs about horse racing ever written:

    Elbow - The Fix followed by The Pogues - Bottle of Smoke.

    (The third being The Galway Farmer by Show of Hands. Go on, treat yourself to a medley - although The Pogues are a bit sweary so may be NSFW...)

    Is there a fourth?

    Sound of the Thunder, maybe? (Fureys)
Sign In or Register to comment.