Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
My take is Trump gives Witkoff, his New York real estate buddy, free reign. Witkoff has no clue, but he's fully bought into Putin and comes back every so often with a hare brained solution that sensible people including to a limited extent US foreign policy experts have to try and limit the damage on.
On whether aggression pays, I think Putin had a realistic chance of prevailing with his three day blitzkrieg on Kyiv. Say 30-50% chance the Ukrainian government would fall or flee the capital. He would then be able to impose a puppet government in Kyiv. Problem is he didn't have a Plan B for when the Ukrainian government held its ground, which is what happened.
Also. The US government has no real stake in supporting Putin. "Not my circus, not my monkeys" is a rational position for them, but Putin Uber alles when he's threatening everyone else isn't. Everyone else can and should face him down. Because they care more.
Worth remembering Lucy Powell only beat Bridget Phillipson 54-46.
That doesn't suggest to me that she would beat Starmer, assuming Starmer did indeed stand.
Bizarrely if a non-credible candidate like Powell stands and Starmer wins easily that will actually strengthen his position and make it more likely he goes all the way to the next GE.
I don’t see how Powell could credibly be the stalking horse, having committed herself so clearly and publicly to Starmer’s leadership in her recent acceptance speech?
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
Did the Mad King not JUST say today Saudi Arabia was being made a friend of NATO or some such?
Tomorrow, "We're leaving..." ?
Trump can't retain a coherent plan in his tiny mind for the duration a single sentence, never mind a whole day.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
no, she has no stomach for battle.
While Rayner is the Boudicca of the North (though of course after some early victories that didn't end well).
Rayner has been hit by scandal and Labour members would vote for Cooper over Streeting, Miliband or Mahmood a Yougov poll found and maybe now over Rayner too
He needs to say that as a teenager he did and said some stupid things, and that he does not believe any of this now.
I'm sure he will.
I hold no candle for Farage but he's always liked to provoke, and I can imagine he was worse when he was young.
On the words: spastic, poof, mong, gay, lepper, and retard.. these were all perfectly normal words used (by those of any political persuasion) in the school playground in the 1980s.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
My take is Trump gives Witkoff, his New York real estate buddy, free reign. Witkoff has no clue, but he's fully bought into Putin and comes back every so often with a hare brained solution that sensible people including to a limited extent US foreign policy experts have to try and limit the damage on.
On whether aggression pays, I think Putin had a realistic chance of prevailing with his three day blitzkrieg on Kyiv. Say 30-50% chance the Ukrainian government would fall or flee the capital. He would then be able to impose a puppet government in Kyiv. Problem is he didn't have a Plan B for when the Ukrainian government held its ground, which is what happened.
Also. The US government has no real stake in supporting Putin. "Not my circus, not my monkeys" is a rational position for them, but Putin Uber alles when he's threatening everyone else isn't. Everyone else can and should face him down. Because they care more.
*Everyone else can and should face Trump down. Because they care more.*
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
Cooper is the safest option by a long chalk.
True, but also most likely to continue the stream of nothingness being delivered by the incumbent
He needs to say that as a teenager he did and said some stupid things, and that he does not believe any of this now.
Only one problem with that.... as a former Russia Today Employee he is still raaaather fond of today's fascists, partly because, of course, he still has the same views as when he was 12.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
no, she has no stomach for battle.
While Rayner is the Boudicca of the North (though of course after some early victories that didn't end well).
Rayner has been hit by scandal and Labour members would vote for Cooper over Streeting, Miliband or Mahmood a Yougov poll found and maybe now over Rayner too
Johnson was fired from the front bench for lying. Didn’t harm his prospects longer term. I still think she’s worth a pint.
Tory MPs only tolerated Johnson as leader from 2019 as polls showed him beating Corbyn comfortably. Rayner would need poll evidence she could beat Farage to be even certain enough Labour MPs ie 80 minimum, would nominate her so she could even get to the members vote
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
My take is Trump gives Witkoff, his New York real estate buddy, free reign. Witkoff has no clue, but he's fully bought into Putin and comes back every so often with a hare brained solution that sensible people including to a limited extent US foreign policy experts have to try and limit the damage on.
On whether aggression pays, I think Putin had a realistic chance of prevailing with his three day blitzkrieg on Kyiv. Say 30-50% chance the Ukrainian government would fall or flee the capital. He would then be able to impose a puppet government in Kyiv. Problem is he didn't have a Plan B for when the Ukrainian government held its ground, which is what happened.
Also. The US government has no real stake in supporting Putin. "Not my circus, not my monkeys" is a rational position for them, but Putin Uber alles when he's threatening everyone else isn't. Everyone else can and should face him down. Because they care more.
*Everyone else can and should face Trump down. Because they care more.*
We've just seen Trump faced down by Greene, Boebart, Mace and Massie.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
Cooper is the safest option by a long chalk.
True, but also most likely to continue the stream of nothingness being delivered by the incumbent
Still, the hard hitting interviews she’ll get on Good Morning Britain may force Cooper into somethingness.
He needs to say that as a teenager he did and said some stupid things, and that he does not believe any of this now.
I'm sure he will.
I hold no candle for Farage but he's always liked to provoke, and I can imagine he was worse when he was young.
On the words: spastic, poof, mong, gay, lepper, and retard.. these were all perfectly normal words used (by those of any political persuasion) in the school playground in the 1980s.
I was at school for the entirety of the 80s (1979-92) and I’m not sure I agree with the entirety your recollection there. We did freely misuse the name of the late Joey Deacon though, to my retrospective shame, in the early part of that period.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
Cooper is the safest option by a long chalk.
If people can chart a route to Andy Burnham becoming MP then PM, why not Mr Ed Cooper?
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
AI companies are going anywhere they can find a power supply. I suspect you could double the price of energy and by the end of 2026 some AI company or other will be desperate enough to pay the price...
Simply put there isn't the spare power capacity in the world across the next 3 years to meet the demand for energy AI has
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
AI companies are going anywhere they can find a power supply. I suspect you could double the price of energy and by the end of 2026 some AI company or other will be desperate enough to pay the price...
Simply put there isn't the spare power capacity in the world across the next 3 years to meet the demand for energy AI has
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
The issue is that it makes regional pricing even less likely, and the lack of r. p. in itself is a developing issue. Edit: so not zero sum thinking per se.
It's not as if the server farms will produce many permanent jobs [edit] locally.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
Cooper is the safest option by a long chalk.
If people can chart a route to Andy Burnham becoming MP then PM, why not Mr Ed Cooper?
He’s carved out a pretty decent post politics career so would he want it ?
Possibly if he gets fed up of the early starts to sit in the sofa next to Susannah or Kate.
I can’t imagine he’s earning less than he would in politics.
"Polling group More in Common has identified a new, distinct voting group called "the disillusioned men," which it says represents a growing dissatisfaction with politics in large parts of the country.
The organisation's research points to a group of men who feel increasingly hopeless, disappointed, and that the "dream of a decent life and opportunity to provide for their families seems out of reach".
It comes on International Men's Day, and coincides with the government's own announcement of a tailored health strategy addressing some of the key concerns affecting men.
But what makes a "disillusioned man," and what does this group tell us about the direction of travel in UK politics?"
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
AI companies are going anywhere they can find a power supply. I suspect you could double the price of energy and by the end of 2026 some AI company or other will be desperate enough to pay the price...
Simply put there isn't the spare power capacity in the world across the next 3 years to meet the demand for energy AI has
The Democrats currently have a 14-point lead against the Republicans among registered voters nationally on the 2026 generic congressional ballot question.
liver Carroll @olliecarroll My understanding of hashed US-Russian peace plan. As ugly as you’d expect: — Ukr army 2.5 x reduction. Only Ukr army. Note: not 2x as speculated — No foreign troops in Ukraine — No foreign diplomatic planes in Ukraine — Ban on long range weapons that can reach ST P, Mos
Oliver Carroll @olliecarroll · 1h — Ceding territory
US side, I’m told, passed information to Ukrainians insisting Zelensky agree to the framework.
This all feels very opportunistic by US side. Ukraine has been critically weakened by its corruptioneers.
Does this really make sense from a US point of view? It's clear the US hasn't wanted to extend a proper security guarantee over Ukraine just as they were reluctant to expand Nato in the 90s. So whilst Trump is promising to stop paying for other people's defence, he agrees something* for Ukraine whilst they themselves are not allowed to fund a proper armed forces themselves?
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
no, she has no stomach for battle.
While Rayner is the Boudicca of the North (though of course after some early victories that didn't end well).
Rayner has been hit by scandal and Labour members would vote for Cooper over Streeting, Miliband or Mahmood a Yougov poll found and maybe now over Rayner too
Johnson was fired from the front bench for lying. Didn’t harm his prospects longer term. I still think she’s worth a pint.
No, but politicians lying is unfortunately somewhat baked in now. The problem for Rayner is the fact that the scandal involved non-payment of tax. To the average voter that’s a much greater sin, on the face of it, because it’s the PM who has to sell tax policy.
Not saying it’s impossible that she can come back, just that I think she’s made it much harder for herself, and if she got there it’s not quite clear how the public would take her.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
Cooper is the safest option by a long chalk.
If people can chart a route to Andy Burnham becoming MP then PM, why not Mr Ed Cooper?
He’s carved out a pretty decent post politics career so would he want it ?
Possibly if he gets fed up of the early starts to sit in the sofa next to Susannah or Kate.
I can’t imagine he’s earning less than he would in politics.
He really would have needed to come back into politics right after Strictly. Too late now.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
The Democrats currently have a 14-point lead against the Republicans among registered voters nationally on the 2026 generic congressional ballot question.
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
AI companies are going anywhere they can find a power supply. I suspect you could double the price of energy and by the end of 2026 some AI company or other will be desperate enough to pay the price...
Simply put there isn't the spare power capacity in the world across the next 3 years to meet the demand for energy AI has
Yep, this is a huge issue. Microsoft has admitted they have no way of powering many of the GPUs they've bought or committed to buy. They're desperate enough to pay for the Three Mile Island nuclear plant to reopen.
But subsidising power for AI companies is insanity. It will go down with the voters like a cup of cold sick, particularly in Scotland where a lot of people are currently shivering in sub-zero temperatures rather then turn on the heating.
Sometimes I can't help but wonder if Starmer is an SNP sleeper agent.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
liver Carroll @olliecarroll My understanding of hashed US-Russian peace plan. As ugly as you’d expect: — Ukr army 2.5 x reduction. Only Ukr army. Note: not 2x as speculated — No foreign troops in Ukraine — No foreign diplomatic planes in Ukraine — Ban on long range weapons that can reach ST P, Mos
Oliver Carroll @olliecarroll · 1h — Ceding territory
US side, I’m told, passed information to Ukrainians insisting Zelensky agree to the framework.
This all feels very opportunistic by US side. Ukraine has been critically weakened by its corruptioneers.
Does this really make sense from a US point of view? It's clear the US hasn't wanted to extend a proper security guarantee over Ukraine just as they were reluctant to expand Nato in the 90s. So whilst Trump is promising to stop paying for other people's defence, he agrees something* for Ukraine whilst they themselves are not allowed to fund a proper armed forces themselves?
*It may not amount to much.
I think you're overthinking it.
Trump wants to be able to claim that he brought peace to Ukraine, and he likes it when others bend at the knee.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
Ukraine should be able to strike at supply lines though. Hitting the Kerch bridge or the railways that run through occupied Ukraine shouldn't be beyond the pail.
On topic, It looks certain that we will have a new Labour leader by the next autumn conference. It is less obvious who that will be.
I cannot see a way for Burnham. A stitched up byelection would be a farce and likely for him to lose, even if he is allowed to stand wherever it is. He should stick to the Mayoralty.
Streeting is obviously going for it, but there is an equally obvious "stop Streeting" faction and that what this remark by Lewis is all about.
My hunch is the second coming of Ms Rayner.
Or Cooper
Cooper is the safest option by a long chalk.
If people can chart a route to Andy Burnham becoming MP then PM, why not Mr Ed Cooper?
He’s carved out a pretty decent post politics career so would he want it ?
Possibly if he gets fed up of the early starts to sit in the sofa next to Susannah or Kate.
I can’t imagine he’s earning less than he would in politics.
Agreed, but from what I remember he's head & shoulders above the present lot.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
If you force Ukraine to fight with one arm tied behind its back then they will lose. If you don't want Ukraine to lose then you have to help them hit Russia where it hurts, and where it's most effective.
Does anyone really care what Farage (or any leading politician ) said when they were younger?
Judge them on what they say now. Plenty to disagree with there without the schooldays stuff. Not the same thing, but remember that attacks on Cameron’s background at uni etc had very little impact, if any.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
Ukraine should be able to strike at supply lines though. Hitting the Kerch bridge or the railways that run through occupied Ukraine shouldn't be beyond the pail.
Goodness, don't bring Ireland into it. There will be mention of us sending tanks in.
liver Carroll @olliecarroll My understanding of hashed US-Russian peace plan. As ugly as you’d expect: — Ukr army 2.5 x reduction. Only Ukr army. Note: not 2x as speculated — No foreign troops in Ukraine — No foreign diplomatic planes in Ukraine — Ban on long range weapons that can reach ST P, Mos
Oliver Carroll @olliecarroll · 1h — Ceding territory
US side, I’m told, passed information to Ukrainians insisting Zelensky agree to the framework.
This all feels very opportunistic by US side. Ukraine has been critically weakened by its corruptioneers.
Does this really make sense from a US point of view? It's clear the US hasn't wanted to extend a proper security guarantee over Ukraine just as they were reluctant to expand Nato in the 90s. So whilst Trump is promising to stop paying for other people's defence, he agrees something* for Ukraine whilst they themselves are not allowed to fund a proper armed forces themselves?
*It may not amount to much.
I think you're overthinking it.
Trump wants to be able to claim that he brought peace to Ukraine, and he likes it when others bend at the knee.
Yeah but he could get critiqued based on his own philosophy. Providing US security guarantees whilst restricting the size of Ukraine's military seems the exact opposite of Trump's philosophy. The GOP has been amazingly supine in Congress but I still have some hope that they'll make a fuss. Jack Keane would also be one to watch.
He needs to say that as a teenager he did and said some stupid things, and that he does not believe any of this now.
I’m sure he has already said something like that when these allegations were first made, about a decade ago
Then why not repeat the apology?
And apologise for his pro-Putin words at the same time.
I don't think we can have as a PM a man who has such close links to our number one foreign threat, one actively engaged in cyberwarfare on us, and commiting murder on our soil.
According to Open Council Data, five changes of allegience today. I mentioned Nur Begum's move from Labour to Newham Independents following her de-selection in Little Ilford in my morning contribution.
Reform now have two Councillors on Westminster following a defection from the Conservatives.
We've had a defection TO the Greens from Labour in Havant and a defection TO Labour in Edinburgh - all part of the warp and weft among Britain's 18,645 councillors.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
Europe and Canada would agree to a ceasefire on current lines as would Zelensky but not Trump's initial proposals
Yes:
Europe and Zelenskyy would take:
- current lines - no restrictions on armed forces - ability to enter into alliances
Russia wants
- more Ukrainan territory - Ukraine to be a puppet state
I hope Ukraine and Europe hold their nerves.
Actually, I hope Europe (and the UK) stops being reactive. It's time to announce something outrageous as the price for peace (Putin's resignation and prosecution for war crimes + all Ukrainian lands). And then it's time to take Russian assets that are frozen and use them to back up Ukraine to the hilt.
Just like the UK government and the economy you have to break the loop where all you are doing is reacting to the other party's moves and switch it round. So Ukraine needs to start affecting Russian energy exports and power generation, and Russia needs to be the one who is reacting.
Sadly, the West's politicians are either venal or weak.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
If you force Ukraine to fight with one arm tied behind its back then they will lose. If you don't want Ukraine to lose then you have to help them hit Russia where it hurts, and where it's most effective.
Russia has more nukes than any nation on earth, you can fight to defend Ukraine by all means but taking an offensive war into Russia could lead to nuclear war
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
$2000 tariff checks gets you votes.
Increasing the price of energy doesn't win you any ....
Don't worry. They heard your cry, and they have got their mojo back.
No 39 of Councillors elected in May, Mark Pickup, lead Councillor in Durham for Finance. Suspended by the party for membership of a Whatsapp Group run by one MissusKent, who is a Yaxley-Lennon supporting rapper, and some statements made therein.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
If you force Ukraine to fight with one arm tied behind its back then they will lose. If you don't want Ukraine to lose then you have to help them hit Russia where it hurts, and where it's most effective.
Also, this is ridiculous. Ukraine have already used Storm Shadows to hit targets in Russia. They used ATACMs to hit a Russian training ground in Belgorod yesterday. What did Russia do? Is London a nuclear wasteland?
Russia did nothing. All your fears of Russian nuclear radiation were for naught.
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
The South Africa plans remind me of the old Adam Curtis series "Pandoras Box" - the episode "Black Power" about the plans for a hydro-electric dam in Ghana.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
If you force Ukraine to fight with one arm tied behind its back then they will lose. If you don't want Ukraine to lose then you have to help them hit Russia where it hurts, and where it's most effective.
Russia has more nukes than any nation on earth, you can fight to defend Ukraine by all means but taking an offensive war into Russia could lead to nuclear war
If you've been paying attention you'll know that the war has already been taken inside Russia. They've used shadow missiles to hit targets there.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
The issue is that it makes regional pricing even less likely, and the lack of r. p. in itself is a developing issue. Edit: so not zero sum thinking per se.
It's not as if the server farms will produce many permanent jobs [edit] locally.
Are you trying to say that becoming an 'AI Superpower' wont cure all our economic woes? You've reminded me of one of my favourite recent government headlines :
"Artificial intelligence will deliver a decade of national renewal, as part of a new plan announced today".
Nothing brings that "oh, that's doomed then" feeling more the a government PR piece with "as part of a new plan announced today". "Made up today". "Hurriedly sketched out on a napkin today". "Keir said what? Wtf? Ok - let's wing it, today"...
"Polling group More in Common has identified a new, distinct voting group called "the disillusioned men," which it says represents a growing dissatisfaction with politics in large parts of the country.
The organisation's research points to a group of men who feel increasingly hopeless, disappointed, and that the "dream of a decent life and opportunity to provide for their families seems out of reach".
It comes on International Men's Day, and coincides with the government's own announcement of a tailored health strategy addressing some of the key concerns affecting men.
But what makes a "disillusioned man," and what does this group tell us about the direction of travel in UK politics?"
The gender imbalance in voting intention is stark and has been for some time.
The current YouGov has, among men, Reform on 31%, Labour on 19% and the Greens on 17%. Among women, Reform have 23%, Labour 20%,. Conservatives 19% (15% among men) and Greens 17%. Baxter the two different set of numbers and it's a 140 seat majority for Reform among men but 58 short of a majority among women so a huge split.
As 2019 showed, if you can dominate among one part of a polarised electorate, it can be enough to win big.
Reform is also strongest among older men (34% support among those aged 50 and older) so it's not aspirational frustration as much as nostalgic frustration - it's not so much wanting a better future, it's about hoping the future will just be the like the past or rather how the past is remembered.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
If you force Ukraine to fight with one arm tied behind its back then they will lose. If you don't want Ukraine to lose then you have to help them hit Russia where it hurts, and where it's most effective.
Russia has more nukes than any nation on earth, you can fight to defend Ukraine by all means but taking an offensive war into Russia could lead to nuclear war
If you've been paying attention you'll know that the war has already been taken inside Russia. They've used shadow missiles to hit targets there.
Which has increased the risk of Putin using a tactical nuke if a major Russian factory or railway line or population centre or government office or barracks were hit
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
None of the above are contenders now though really and nor is Burnham unless he returns as an MP. The likeliest successors to Starmer are presently Streeting, Cooper or Ed Miliband
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
The South Africa plans remind me of the old Adam Curtis series "Pandoras Box" - the episode "Black Power" about the plans for a hydro-electric dam in Ghana.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
The public probably wants someone from outside politics like Martin Lewis or Matthew Syed. The Dutch recently had someone like this as PM.
Does anyone really care what Farage (or any leading politician ) said when they were younger?
Judge them on what they say now. Plenty to disagree with there without the schooldays stuff. Not the same thing, but remember that attacks on Cameron’s background at uni etc had very little impact, if any.
Except that everyone who sees him is reminded of that episode of Black Mirror.
Does anyone really care what Farage (or any leading politician ) said when they were younger?
Judge them on what they say now. Plenty to disagree with there without the schooldays stuff. Not the same thing, but remember that attacks on Cameron’s background at uni etc had very little impact, if any.
If it’s a political opponent they care, if it’s an ally they don’t.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
None of the above are contenders now though really and nor is Burnham unless he returns as an MP. The likeliest successors to Starmer are presently Streeting, Cooper or Ed Miliband
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
If you force Ukraine to fight with one arm tied behind its back then they will lose. If you don't want Ukraine to lose then you have to help them hit Russia where it hurts, and where it's most effective.
Russia has more nukes than any nation on earth, you can fight to defend Ukraine by all means but taking an offensive war into Russia could lead to nuclear war
If you've been paying attention you'll know that the war has already been taken inside Russia. They've used shadow missiles to hit targets there.
Which has increased the risk of Putin using a tactical nuke if a major Russian factory or railway line or population centre or government office or barracks were hit
You've stopped using punctuation. I like it. Kinda hip.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
Europe and Canada would agree to a ceasefire on current lines as would Zelensky but not Trump's initial proposals
Yes:
Europe and Zelenskyy would take:
- current lines - no restrictions on armed forces - ability to enter into alliances
Russia wants
- more Ukrainan territory - Ukraine to be a puppet state
I hope Ukraine and Europe hold their nerves.
Actually, I hope Europe (and the UK) stops being reactive. It's time to announce something outrageous as the price for peace (Putin's resignation and prosecution for war crimes + all Ukrainian lands). And then it's time to take Russian assets that are frozen and use them to back up Ukraine to the hilt.
Just like the UK government and the economy you have to break the loop where all you are doing is reacting to the other party's moves and switch it round. So Ukraine needs to start affecting Russian energy exports and power generation, and Russia needs to be the one who is reacting.
Sadly, the West's politicians are either venal or weak.
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
Thinking about a comparable situation - the aluminium smelter opened with a great fanfare at Invergordon* because jobs.
Interestingly, unlike Fort William/Kinlochleven, which relied on hydro (I think in one case owned ny the factory), Invergordon relied on a contract with SSEB who ran Hunterston AGCR. But the latter was delayed and overpriced, which screwed the smelter ... and also the local electricity board (not the one which ran Hunterston). "NoSHEB was now completely hemmed in. On one side was their determination not to disadvantage their other customers. On the other was their contract with SSEB [the reactor operator] which kept pushing through the additional costs. They had no room for manoeuvre."
I suspect that lesson is well known to industry. Not so sure about UKG.
* Go to Edinburgh. Then keep going through Perth to Inverness. Then keep going, across two firths, to this small town with oil platforms parked off the beach for storage.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
The issue is that it makes regional pricing even less likely, and the lack of r. p. in itself is a developing issue. Edit: so not zero sum thinking per se.
It's not as if the server farms will produce many permanent jobs [edit] locally.
Are you trying to say that becoming an 'AI Superpower' wont cure all our economic woes? You've reminded me of one of my favourite recent government headlines :
"Artificial intelligence will deliver a decade of national renewal, as part of a new plan announced today".
Nothing brings that "oh, that's doomed then" feeling more the a government PR piece with "as part of a new plan announced today". "Made up today". "Hurriedly sketched out on a napkin today". "Keir said what? Wtf? Ok - let's wing it, today"...
Not particvularly: just wondering on the effects on the *local* or in UKGspeak *regional* economic woes.
Far too little attention is paid to the fact that without China, Russia would not be able to continue fighting the war as they are. On Trump's watch they have upped their level of support.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
The South Africa plans remind me of the old Adam Curtis series "Pandoras Box" - the episode "Black Power" about the plans for a hydro-electric dam in Ghana.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
The public probably wants someone from outside politics like Martin Lewis or Matthew Syed. The Dutch recently had someone like this as PM.
Media heartthrob and Daily Mail columnist Boris Johnson?
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
Europe and Canada would agree to a ceasefire on current lines as would Zelensky but not Trump's initial proposals
Yes:
Europe and Zelenskyy would take:
- current lines - no restrictions on armed forces - ability to enter into alliances
Russia wants
- more Ukrainan territory - Ukraine to be a puppet state
I hope Ukraine and Europe hold their nerves.
Actually, I hope Europe (and the UK) stops being reactive. It's time to announce something outrageous as the price for peace (Putin's resignation and prosecution for war crimes + all Ukrainian lands). And then it's time to take Russian assets that are frozen and use them to back up Ukraine to the hilt.
Just like the UK government and the economy you have to break the loop where all you are doing is reacting to the other party's moves and switch it round. So Ukraine needs to start affecting Russian energy exports and power generation, and Russia needs to be the one who is reacting.
Sadly, the West's politicians are either venal or weak.
Europe and Ukraine must hold their nerve.
Cede on this and it’s a total capitulation.
Writing has been on the wall ever since the GOP turned against Ukraine. No good options remain, so some variety of bad is all that is likely available.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
One potential problem is that Europe is reliant on the US for a lot of critical defense technology. For example, the storm shadow/scalp-eg missiles contain US components, so we required US permission for Ukraine to use them to strike targets inside Russia. If there's an acrimonious parting of the ways with the US then Europe is seriously fucked in the short term. Now, maybe Trump would be happy to keep selling stuff to Europe, but this means that Europe finds itself in a weak strategic position with lots of bad choices.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
We shouldn't be targeting targets inside Russia anyway, arms should be provided to Zelensky to maintain current lines
We could target Crimea, which we don’t recognise as part of Russia.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
Cutting power bills for datacenters and loading increased prices on consumers is monumentally stupid.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
The South Africa plans remind me of the old Adam Curtis series "Pandoras Box" - the episode "Black Power" about the plans for a hydro-electric dam in Ghana.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
I think we may well be close to the point where Europe will effectively sideline the USA from a funding point of view. Certain USA capabilities will still be needed, of course.
I suggest the decisive point will be when the funding around seized Russian assets is finally put in place. That will ensure maybe €100 billion over several years.
That is perhaps effectively more than double the aid the USA has put in since the start, taking into account that they overvalue it.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
The issue is that it makes regional pricing even less likely, and the lack of r. p. in itself is a developing issue. Edit: so not zero sum thinking per se.
It's not as if the server farms will produce many permanent jobs [edit] locally.
Are you trying to say that becoming an 'AI Superpower' wont cure all our economic woes? You've reminded me of one of my favourite recent government headlines :
"Artificial intelligence will deliver a decade of national renewal, as part of a new plan announced today".
Nothing brings that "oh, that's doomed then" feeling more the a government PR piece with "as part of a new plan announced today". "Made up today". "Hurriedly sketched out on a napkin today". "Keir said what? Wtf? Ok - let's wing it, today"...
Not particvularly: just wondering on the effects on the *local* or in UKGspeak *regional* economic woes.
Though there's that too, now you mention it.
US companies get to offload a chunk of their power generation woes onto the UK. Luckily for them - our power companies and grid haven't spent the last 30 years creaming off profits from ageing infrastructure like they have in the USA.
Phew!
See also the water industry for the data-center cooling. Phew^2!
Far too little attention is paid to the fact that without China, Russia would not be able to continue fighting the war as they are. On Trump's watch they have upped their level of support.
China is officially neutral on the Russia-Ukraine war and officially wants a peace deal, unlike N Korea which has sent troops to help Russia. China just has not cut economic ties with Russia
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Yes, Labour are panicking, and they are justified in doing so. The game of pass the parcel stopped with them winning the prize, just before it turned out that the prize was a long-unexploded bomb just about to go off. And none of them have the speed of reaction to cope. And the public have noticed.
They are nitwits, or at least acting like nitwits, due to the panic.
The analogue is John Major between 1993 and 1997. Everyone (including JM himself, I suspect) would have been happy to see him go, except for the knotty problem of needing to find a replacement. Since there wasn't a broadly-tolerable one, he stayed on.
Labour's least bad hope- and short of a coup, the country's least bad hope- is that someone at the lower end of the top table shines over the next couple of years and is ready to take over in late 2027/early 2028. Accept that unpleasant truth, and everything else falls into place.
That's not an analogue. Major was a decent, a surprisingly competent PM who dealt remarkably well with a tiny majority, and a bunch of idiots on the backbenches.
I don't see much correspondence there with Starmer.
BREAKING: Former Trump White House Attorney Ty Cobb just said that Pam Bondi and Lindsey Halligan should be disbarred, and that Bondi lied to the courts:
“I do think that both Halligan and Bondi should be disbarred. Bondi has twice submitted affirmations to this court about the propriety of Lindsey Halligan’s grand jury presentation. That just means that she lied."
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
While I don’t agree with the policy the paper’s framing is the epitome of the zero sum thinking that infects our politics (“Resources allocated to group x is a kick in the teeth to group y”)
The issue is that it makes regional pricing even less likely, and the lack of r. p. in itself is a developing issue. Edit: so not zero sum thinking per se.
It's not as if the server farms will produce many permanent jobs [edit] locally.
Are you trying to say that becoming an 'AI Superpower' wont cure all our economic woes? You've reminded me of one of my favourite recent government headlines :
"Artificial intelligence will deliver a decade of national renewal, as part of a new plan announced today".
Nothing brings that "oh, that's doomed then" feeling more the a government PR piece with "as part of a new plan announced today". "Made up today". "Hurriedly sketched out on a napkin today". "Keir said what? Wtf? Ok - let's wing it, today"...
Not particvularly: just wondering on the effects on the *local* or in UKGspeak *regional* economic woes.
Though there's that too, now you mention it.
US companies get to offload a chunk of their power generation woes onto the UK. Luckily for them - our power companies and grid haven't spent the last 30 years creaming off profits from ageing infrastructure like they have in the USA.
Phew!
See also the water industry for the data-center cooling. Phew^2!
There are some press stories goiung around about Edinburgh suddenly needing 2-4 x the power, water etc. because data centre proposals [edit]. No idea myself how true that is. But it will not go down well with the natives. Or indeed if UKG plonk them down without asking the natives.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
Europe and Canada would agree to a ceasefire on current lines as would Zelensky but not Trump's initial proposals
Yes:
Europe and Zelenskyy would take:
- current lines - no restrictions on armed forces - ability to enter into alliances
Russia wants
- more Ukrainan territory - Ukraine to be a puppet state
I hope Ukraine and Europe hold their nerves.
Actually, I hope Europe (and the UK) stops being reactive. It's time to announce something outrageous as the price for peace (Putin's resignation and prosecution for war crimes + all Ukrainian lands). And then it's time to take Russian assets that are frozen and use them to back up Ukraine to the hilt.
Just like the UK government and the economy you have to break the loop where all you are doing is reacting to the other party's moves and switch it round. So Ukraine needs to start affecting Russian energy exports and power generation, and Russia needs to be the one who is reacting.
Sadly, the West's politicians are either venal or weak.
Europe and Ukraine must hold their nerve.
Cede on this and it’s a total capitulation.
Writing has been on the wall ever since the GOP turned against Ukraine. No good options remain, so some variety of bad is all that is likely available.
I don't think most of the GOP in Congress is anti Ukraine? Obviously the noisiest ones are. The rest are cowards.
'Lanyard class' like a lot of similar labels, is meaningless junk.
One of the stupidest such labels is 'the elite', which really means 'people I don't like'; it's used extensively by many who themselves qualify as 'elite' by any objective measure.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
I think we may well be close to the point where Europe will effectively sideline the USA from a funding point of view. Certain USA capabilities will still be needed, of course.
I suggest the decisive point will be when the funding around seized Russian assets is finally put in place. That will ensure maybe €100 billion over several years.
That is perhaps effectively more than double the aid the USA has put in since the start, taking into account that they overvalue it.
We can tell the USA to go, if they threaten to leave NATO.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
Trump sends his demand to the UK and other members of NATO, as well as the EU. He tells them that unless they back it, the US will leave NATO (which Trump has always wanted to do).
The ball is then in Europe's court.
Europe can afford to tell the US to fuck off. They can also point out to the adminisrtation that it is US arms manufacturers who would pay the highest price for the disentegration of NATO.
I don't know what Europe will do. Hungary supports Russia, of course.
Poland and the Baltics are the most hawkish.
The rest of Europe ... well, we'll see. Europe has the ability to ensure Russia's defeat. But so long have they been prepared to hide behind the US's coattails, that they do not seem willing to confront the new reality.
They also know that Trump could well impose another round of tariffs on Europe if they fail to fall into lin.
I hope that the leaders of Europe - Mertz, Macron, Starmer and Meloni - have the balls to stand up and do what is not just right, but what is long term the one with the most positive outcome. The problem is that they want to be reelected. And their economies are already creaking.
We need someone in Europe with balls and vision and strength. Will that person arise, or will Europe fold?
Europe and Canada would agree to a ceasefire on current lines as would Zelensky but not Trump's initial proposals
Yes:
Europe and Zelenskyy would take:
- current lines - no restrictions on armed forces - ability to enter into alliances
Russia wants
- more Ukrainan territory - Ukraine to be a puppet state
I hope Ukraine and Europe hold their nerves.
Actually, I hope Europe (and the UK) stops being reactive. It's time to announce something outrageous as the price for peace (Putin's resignation and prosecution for war crimes + all Ukrainian lands). And then it's time to take Russian assets that are frozen and use them to back up Ukraine to the hilt.
Just like the UK government and the economy you have to break the loop where all you are doing is reacting to the other party's moves and switch it round. So Ukraine needs to start affecting Russian energy exports and power generation, and Russia needs to be the one who is reacting.
Sadly, the West's politicians are either venal or weak.
Europe and Ukraine must hold their nerve.
Cede on this and it’s a total capitulation.
Writing has been on the wall ever since the GOP turned against Ukraine. No good options remain, so some variety of bad is all that is likely available.
I don't think most of the GOP in Congress is anti Ukraine? Obviously the noisiest ones are. The rest are cowards.
At some point in my lifetime, the GOP became despicable.
Far too little attention is paid to the fact that without China, Russia would not be able to continue fighting the war as they are. On Trump's watch they have upped their level of support.
China is officially neutral on the Russia-Ukraine war and officially wants a peace deal, unlike N Korea which has sent troops to help Russia. China just has not cut economic ties with Russia
That's nonsense.
Firstly why do you assume that China's official position is the same as their actual one? Do you take them at their word? They have been providing all kinds of essential military technology. No-one seems to dispute that.
He was a shock jock at school nearly 40 years ago.
So what?
Comedy Nazi salutes and stuff like this was par for the course when I was at school.
Have you read the extent of the allegations? It's really hideous stuff that goes way beyond anything I ever saw at my secondary school. Mind you I didn't go to a private school, where standards of behaviour seem to be far worse than in the state sector. What concerns me is that Farage seems unable to express any remorse or even acknowledge what happened. So either all these people are lying, or Farage did it but thinks he did nothing wrong. That speaks very poorly of his character.
Normalising thus kind of shit, just because you have done kind of sympathy with his politics is not great.
I'm of a similar age to Farage. Kids were, it's true, casually racist back then, but I would have been disgusted by someone behaving like that at my school. That's not hindsight.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
🚨SCOOP: The new Trump plan to end the war in Ukraine would grant Russia parts of eastern Ukraine it does not currently control, in exchange for a U.S. security guarantee for Ukraine and Europe against future Russian aggression.
Appeasement didn't work in 1938 and no reason to think it'd work now.
Depends what appeasement was for, really. It bought us a bit of time, and also made it clear that anything further meant war. I think opinion is divided on whether Chamberlain believed he had secured peace.
The evidence is mixed but the steps he took subsequently in respect of rearmament shows that he was preparing for war and in an unprecedented way. Now that might simply have been Si vis pacem, para bellum but I for one believe he knew it would come to it in the end.
The Origin Story podcast had a recent 2-parter on appeasement, and came down fairly hard on Chamberlain.
I've been busy all day but have I got it right that some Labour MPs want to replace Starmer with one of -
1.Someone who has not been in Parliament for nearly 9 years and got 19% of the vote when he stood for leader last time (Andy Burnham). 2. A nitwit who came third when she stood for Labour leader in 2020 with 16% of the vote (Lisa Nandy). 3. Another nitwit (Lucy Powell). 4. Someone convicted of fraud a decade ago (Louise Haigh) though, ironically, she appears to be more intelligent than the others and had a better record in her short Ministerial career.
Do they think emulating the Tory party's policy of ousting leaders every year or so is a good idea? Or are they all a bunch of panicking nitwits?
Unfortunately for Labour, they need a leader with competence and charisma, and they don’t have any.
Looks to me like they need to rethink the criteria for appointing PPCs.
You mean, Politics graduate, SPAD, constituency organiser isn’t the ideal career path? I’m shocked, I tell you!
As a matter of interest who on the Labour front bench came that route? No one springs to mind.
That is the route for PPCs. They don’t have the skills or ability to progress to the front bench, which is why there are so few contenders for front bench posts.
Comments
On whether aggression pays, I think Putin had a realistic chance of prevailing with his three day blitzkrieg on Kyiv. Say 30-50% chance the Ukrainian government would fall or flee the capital. He would then be able to impose a puppet government in Kyiv. Problem is he didn't have a Plan B for when the Ukrainian government held its ground, which is what happened.
Also. The US government has no real stake in supporting Putin. "Not my circus, not my monkeys" is a rational position for them, but Putin Uber alles when he's threatening everyone else isn't. Everyone else can and should face him down. Because they care more.
Was it approved?
"LABOUR are planning to cut electricity prices for tech companies while energy bills continue to leave families struggling, The National can reveal.
The UK Government has set out plans to slash costs for artificial intelligence (AI) data centres –saving companies as much as £80 million per year.
Campaigners said the plans were a “gut punch” to people struggling with the cost of living."
interesting. Given Labour are already vulnerable in the north, west and south west on regional pricing ...
Green councillor quits party, due to disregard for women’s rights
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2025v7qleo
Simply put there isn't the spare power capacity in the world across the next 3 years to meet the demand for energy AI has
It's not as if the server farms will produce many permanent jobs [edit] locally.
Possibly if he gets fed up of the early starts to sit in the sofa next to Susannah or Kate.
I can’t imagine he’s earning less than he would in politics.
The organisation's research points to a group of men who feel increasingly hopeless, disappointed, and that the "dream of a decent life and opportunity to provide for their families seems out of reach".
It comes on International Men's Day, and coincides with the government's own announcement of a tailored health strategy addressing some of the key concerns affecting men.
But what makes a "disillusioned man," and what does this group tell us about the direction of travel in UK politics?"
https://www.itv.com/news/2025-11-19/the-disillusioned-men-who-are-they-and-what-do-they-want
*It may not amount to much.
Not saying it’s impossible that she can come back, just that I think she’s made it much harder for herself, and if she got there it’s not quite clear how the public would take her.
We need to keep Trump onside as much as possible, for as long as possible, and then use that time to prepare to be able to survive a rupture. But not at the cost of abandoning Ukraine.
It's a truly awful position to be in. Things are going to get worse before they get better.
But it doesn't matter if Trump continues to damage the GOP brand.
About twenty years ago, South Africa said "what do we have loads of?" and thought "coal"!
They decided they would promise cheap power to people who build aluminium smelters and the like, so that they could bring industry to South Africa.
It worked, and it didn't work.
They brought some industry to South Africa, but at the expense of rolling blackouts for the population because these facilities got contracts that gave them first dibs at power.
It totally fucked up the South African economy.
At least, though, they got a few jobs out of it.
How many people do you think work in an AI datacenter? You build one where power is cheap and cooling easy, and you sign up customers from all over the world. Norway and Iceland are the obvious places. Or somewhere both sunny and with lots of gas for backup (like Texas, Arizona or Nevada).
There is literally no competitive advantage to us. There are no jobs. And it would fuck over British consumers.
It is hard to think of a stupider economic policy. Except possibly $2,000 'tariff checks' when you're running a 6% budget deficit.
But subsidising power for AI companies is insanity. It will go down with the voters like a cup of cold sick, particularly in Scotland where a lot of people are currently shivering in sub-zero temperatures rather then turn on the heating.
Sometimes I can't help but wonder if Starmer is an SNP sleeper agent.
Trump wants to be able to claim that he brought peace to Ukraine, and he likes it when others bend at the knee.
Judge them on what they say now. Plenty to disagree with there without the schooldays stuff. Not the same thing, but remember that attacks on Cameron’s background at uni etc had very little impact, if any.
And apologise for his pro-Putin words at the same time.
I don't think we can have as a PM a man who has such close links to our number one foreign threat, one actively engaged in cyberwarfare on us, and commiting murder on our soil.
According to Open Council Data, five changes of allegience today. I mentioned Nur Begum's move from Labour to Newham Independents following her de-selection in Little Ilford in my morning contribution.
Reform now have two Councillors on Westminster following a defection from the Conservatives.
We've had a defection TO the Greens from Labour in Havant and a defection TO Labour in Edinburgh - all part of the warp and weft among Britain's 18,645 councillors.
Europe and Zelenskyy would take:
- current lines
- no restrictions on armed forces
- ability to enter into alliances
Russia wants
- more Ukrainan territory
- Ukraine to be a puppet state
I hope Ukraine and Europe hold their nerves.
Actually, I hope Europe (and the UK) stops being reactive. It's time to announce something outrageous as the price for peace (Putin's resignation and prosecution for war crimes + all Ukrainian lands). And then it's time to take Russian assets that are frozen and use them to back up Ukraine to the hilt.
Just like the UK government and the economy you have to break the loop where all you are doing is reacting to the other party's moves and switch it round. So Ukraine needs to start affecting Russian energy exports and power generation, and Russia needs to be the one who is reacting.
Sadly, the West's politicians are either venal or weak.
Increasing the price of energy doesn't win you any ....
No 39 of Councillors elected in May, Mark Pickup, lead Councillor in Durham for Finance. Suspended by the party for membership of a Whatsapp Group run by one MissusKent, who is a Yaxley-Lennon supporting rapper, and some statements made therein.
https://lancashire.thelead.uk/p/breaking-senior-reform-uk-figure
This lady. It goes downhill after verse one:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/S5S0v1io8Y4
Russia did nothing. All your fears of Russian nuclear radiation were for naught.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandora's_Box_(British_TV_series)#Part_5._'Black_Power'
(It's much more desperate and depressing than the wikipedia summary suggests)
Definitely lanyard
- councillor,
- political advisor,
- lobbyist,
- researcher for an MP or SPAD,
- NHS (support staff)
- working in policy or for a think tank,
- police (I've seen "Line Of Duty"),
- academic,
- charity worker
Possibly lanyard- NHS (nurses, doctors etc),
Possibly not lanyard"Artificial intelligence will deliver a decade of national renewal, as part of a new plan announced today".
Nothing brings that "oh, that's doomed then" feeling more the a government PR piece with "as part of a new plan announced today". "Made up today". "Hurriedly sketched out on a napkin today". "Keir said what? Wtf? Ok - let's wing it, today"...
The gender imbalance in voting intention is stark and has been for some time.
The current YouGov has, among men, Reform on 31%, Labour on 19% and the Greens on 17%. Among women, Reform have 23%, Labour 20%,. Conservatives 19% (15% among men) and Greens 17%. Baxter the two different set of numbers and it's a 140 seat majority for Reform among men but 58 short of a majority among women so a huge split.
As 2019 showed, if you can dominate among one part of a polarised electorate, it can be enough to win big.
Reform is also strongest among older men (34% support among those aged 50 and older) so it's not aspirational frustration as much as nostalgic frustration - it's not so much wanting a better future, it's about hoping the future will just be the like the past or rather how the past is remembered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UidPGHvBc4Y&list=PLez3PPtnpncSsGAbojClT-ATOFjyiDAGk&index=5
Will give it a watch.
Cede on this and it’s a total capitulation.
Interestingly, unlike Fort William/Kinlochleven, which relied on hydro (I think in one case owned ny the factory), Invergordon relied on a contract with SSEB who ran Hunterston AGCR. But the latter was delayed and overpriced, which screwed the smelter ... and also the local electricity board (not the one which ran Hunterston). "NoSHEB was now completely hemmed in. On one side was their determination not to disadvantage their other customers. On the other was their contract with SSEB [the reactor operator] which kept pushing through the additional costs. They had no room for manoeuvre."
https://www.rossandcromartyheritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Invergordon-Smelter-Complete-Document.pdf
I suspect that lesson is well known to industry. Not so sure about UKG.
* Go to Edinburgh. Then keep going through Perth to Inverness. Then keep going, across two firths, to this small town with oil platforms parked off the beach for storage.
Though there's that too, now you mention it.
None of which are on that list
https://thoughtmaybe.com/by/adam-curtis/
https://www.youtube.com/@justadamcurtis9178
I suggest the decisive point will be when the funding around seized Russian assets is finally put in place. That will ensure maybe €100 billion over several years.
That is perhaps effectively more than double the aid the USA has put in since the start, taking into account that they overvalue it.
Phew!
See also the water industry for the data-center cooling. Phew^2!
Major was a decent, a surprisingly competent PM who dealt remarkably well with a tiny majority, and a bunch of idiots on the backbenches.
I don't see much correspondence there with Starmer.
BREAKING: Former Trump White House Attorney Ty Cobb just said that Pam Bondi and Lindsey Halligan should be disbarred, and that Bondi lied to the courts:
“I do think that both Halligan and Bondi should be disbarred. Bondi has twice submitted affirmations to this court about the propriety of Lindsey Halligan’s grand jury presentation. That just means that she lied."
https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/1991243856252137793?s=20
One of the stupidest such labels is 'the elite', which really means 'people I don't like'; it's used extensively by many who themselves qualify as 'elite' by any objective measure.
Firstly why do you assume that China's official position is the same as their actual one? Do you take them at their word? They have been providing all kinds of essential military technology. No-one seems to dispute that.
I'm of a similar age to Farage. Kids were, it's true, casually racist back then, but I would have been disgusted by someone behaving like that at my school.
That's not hindsight.
Work from home/self employed = no Lanyard
Workplace requiring secure access = Lanyard