I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Apols if this has been done (busy couple of days not reading the news). But it struck me as a 'Surely. Surely this must give Trump a reason to back Ukraine?'. Forlornly possibly.
Russia sharing intelligence on US positions with Iran, sources tell CBS News
"Sources have told the BBC's US partner, CBS News, that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions to Iran.
It cites three unnamed sources familiar with the matter, including a senior US official it says has direct knowledge.
The Washington Post initially reported that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions, citing three unnamed officials.
Russian state media reported earlier that Vladimir Putin's spokesperson said Russia was in "dialogue" with Iranian leadership.
Reuters reports that the Kremlin declined to provide details when asked by reporters whether Moscow was helping Tehran."
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
Whilst I think you are right overall, do you not see Rand Paul perhaps voting for impeachment given his increasing hostility to Trump?
If the war continues, then he's one of the Senators with the most obviously evolving spine!
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Why is that first fossil worth a million quid? It looks like a huge petrified turd
And wtf is this about:
"Pokemon Fossil Boosters Box - Mystery of the Fossils - Factory Sealed JapaneseOpens in a new window or tab Brand new £45,194.88 or Best Offer Free delivery from Italy 63 watchers"
Collectors are paying £50k for special Pokemon gifts??
Leavitt now saying that unconditional surrender means whatever Donald Trump decides it means.
It doesn't actually have to involve a surrender.
This is bloody alice in wonderland and the Red Queen world now
And yet we have politicians here saying we should back this megalomaniac, when we weren't consulted, and gave little idea what it is that we're backing.
Facebook reminded me of this photo I took a couple of years ago. I’m really quite pleased with it. I don’t think there’s a building of any sort in view
Facebook reminded me of this photo I took a couple of years ago. I’m really quite pleased with it. I don’t think there’s a building of any sort in view
Apols if this has been done (busy couple of days not reading the news). But it struck me as a 'Surely. Surely this must give Trump a reason to back Ukraine?'. Forlornly possibly.
Russia sharing intelligence on US positions with Iran, sources tell CBS News
"Sources have told the BBC's US partner, CBS News, that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions to Iran.
It cites three unnamed sources familiar with the matter, including a senior US official it says has direct knowledge.
The Washington Post initially reported that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions, citing three unnamed officials.
Russian state media reported earlier that Vladimir Putin's spokesperson said Russia was in "dialogue" with Iranian leadership.
Reuters reports that the Kremlin declined to provide details when asked by reporters whether Moscow was helping Tehran."
Yes, Zelensky being shrewd backed Trump and Netanyahu's strikes on Iran straight away thus giving a clear contrast to POTUS to Putin's now active support for the Iranian regime. Even if he has some reservations about how they comply with international law at the moment his main priority is to get military aid and supplies increased from the US again to help in the Ukraine war effort https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-889048
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
U.K. fossils is a good start point. Depends what you want.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
Whilst I think you are right overall, do you not see Rand Paul perhaps voting for impeachment given his increasing hostility to Trump?
If the war continues, then he's one of the Senators with the most obviously evolving spine!
He refused to endorse Trump at the last election and has already clashed with him plenty. I think he is certainly one to watch. Though that still gets you to only 56 even if everything else goes right. Though I do take the point made earlier by MM that some Republicans might see dumping Trump as their best chance of surviving past 2028
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Why is that first fossil worth a million quid? It looks like a huge petrified turd
And wtf is this about:
"Pokemon Fossil Boosters Box - Mystery of the Fossils - Factory Sealed JapaneseOpens in a new window or tab Brand new £45,194.88 or Best Offer Free delivery from Italy 63 watchers"
Collectors are paying £50k for special Pokemon gifts??
Weren't you telling us you sold a crappy old flint for something like that amount the other day ? 😏
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
Whilst I think you are right overall, do you not see Rand Paul perhaps voting for impeachment given his increasing hostility to Trump?
If the war continues, then he's one of the Senators with the most obviously evolving spine!
He refused to endorse Trump at the last election and has already clashed with him plenty. I think he is certainly one to watch. Though that still gets you to only 56 even if everything else goes right. Though I do take the point made earlier by MM that some Republicans might see dumping Trump as their best chance of surviving past 2028
If they do that Trump will create his own Reform like party in the US and given most of the GOP now is MAGA that means the GOP would come under the same existential threat as the Tories have from Reform since they removed Boris as their leader and PM
Someone in the hydrocarbons infrastructure business can hopefully explain why the gulf states haven’t built loads of pipelines to take all their oil directly to the Arabian Sea, given the obvious vulnerability of the Red Sea and Straits of Hormuz.
There are one or two, like the UAE pipe to Fujairah, but nothing major.
Apols if this has been done (busy couple of days not reading the news). But it struck me as a 'Surely. Surely this must give Trump a reason to back Ukraine?'. Forlornly possibly.
Russia sharing intelligence on US positions with Iran, sources tell CBS News
"Sources have told the BBC's US partner, CBS News, that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions to Iran.
It cites three unnamed sources familiar with the matter, including a senior US official it says has direct knowledge.
The Washington Post initially reported that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions, citing three unnamed officials.
Russian state media reported earlier that Vladimir Putin's spokesperson said Russia was in "dialogue" with Iranian leadership.
Reuters reports that the Kremlin declined to provide details when asked by reporters whether Moscow was helping Tehran."
At some point in the future - post Trump - there will be an investigation into Russian influence in the US administration. It's the only thing that really explains the Trump approach to Ukraine.
Tulsi Gabbard is openly described as a Russian asset by American commentators and, so far as I know, she has made no attempt to prosecute them for libel. And, of course, she controls the flow of intel to Trump. Nothing in Trumpworld would surprise me.
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Why is that first fossil worth a million quid? It looks like a huge petrified turd
And wtf is this about:
"Pokemon Fossil Boosters Box - Mystery of the Fossils - Factory Sealed JapaneseOpens in a new window or tab Brand new £45,194.88 or Best Offer Free delivery from Italy 63 watchers"
Collectors are paying £50k for special Pokemon gifts??
Weren't you telling us you sold a crappy old flint for something like that amount the other day ? 😏
Csn anyone recommend an alternative to Betfair, either an exchange type deal or a regular bookie where one can lay/back against in football markets?
Specifically I want to bet against Cov gaining promotion, ideally laying for a £1000-1500 return, assuming pricing is reasonable. Thanks.
(Betfair have singled my account out for 're-verification' for some reason, and have completely locked me out, despite my sending perfectly good documentation three days ago...)
Smarkets. As a long suffering Cov fan I fear that one is more likely than the pundits think..
Tell me about it... in 2001 I spent ages mid-season trying to find someone that would offer me odds on Angel not scoring a single goal for V*lla until their game against us, when he'd definitely score. Probably should've been worth 50/1 or thereabouts, maybe longer.
Smarkets is no go, sadly. They appear to have zero available liquidity, except on the 'Winner' market, which I don't care about...
It's annoying me to see 1/25 for promotion and think 'Yeah, great, so let us pessimists/realists have a piece of that on the downside!'...
Facebook reminded me of this photo I took a couple of years ago. I’m really quite pleased with it. I don’t think there’s a building of any sort in view
Similarly this guy https://bsky.app/profile/robin-j-brooks.bsky.social thinks it takes just one drone attack on a tanker as it passes by Iranian territory to bring the trade to a halt, and there is no way America can stop that single drone attack.
Which implies Hormuz will only be open again if the Iranians want it to be. And that implies in turn a deal between America and whoever is in charge in Iran.
It means getting rid of the Iranian navy (job pretty much done already), then getting sufficient air and sea assets in place around the Straight to defend against anything incoming.
In practice that means first taking out all known fixed launch facilities, then getting in to place a number of warships, with aircraft and helicopter support, as well as ground-based and sea-based SAM air defence systems, overseen by AWACS and satellite-based surveillance.
The US could do it, and the GCC states would be happy to assist if it keeps the oil flowing.
The IRGC navy is still largely intact, and would be the ones to be doing this in any case.
Do we know that? What have the B1 and B52 bombers been doing if not twatting everything that might hold a vessel? Sure, it needs only to be small vessels that can lay mines. But anything getting even a mile off the coast of Iran is a total failure of the US and Israeli air forces and navies.
Also worth considering they don't need to lay mines to close the Strait. Their anti-ship missiles have a range of 1000 Km.
Apols if this has been done (busy couple of days not reading the news). But it struck me as a 'Surely. Surely this must give Trump a reason to back Ukraine?'. Forlornly possibly.
Russia sharing intelligence on US positions with Iran, sources tell CBS News
"Sources have told the BBC's US partner, CBS News, that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions to Iran.
It cites three unnamed sources familiar with the matter, including a senior US official it says has direct knowledge.
The Washington Post initially reported that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions, citing three unnamed officials.
Russian state media reported earlier that Vladimir Putin's spokesperson said Russia was in "dialogue" with Iranian leadership.
Reuters reports that the Kremlin declined to provide details when asked by reporters whether Moscow was helping Tehran."
At some point in the future - post Trump - there will be an investigation into Russian influence in the US administration. It's the only thing that really explains the Trump approach to Ukraine.
Tulsi Gabbard is openly described as a Russian asset by American commentators and, so far as I know, she has made no attempt to prosecute them for libel. And, of course, she controls the flow of intel to Trump. Nothing in Trumpworld would surprise me.
Peter Zeihan is one such commentator:
Here are the key points regarding Peter Zeihan's commentary on Tulsi Gabbard: Director of National Intelligence Role: Zeihan states that in a Trump administration (as of his March/May 2025 analysis), Gabbard was appointed Director of National Intelligence. Purging Intelligence Experts: Zeihan alleges that Gabbard has "gutted" intelligence bureaus, specifically removing Russian experts from top to bottom, which he suggests undermines U.S. counter-intelligence efforts. Accusations of Russian Alignment: Zeihan frequently refers to her as a "useful idiot" for Russia or a "traitor" whose worldview is almost identical to Vladimir Putin's. Influence on Intelligence: Zeihan claims she has final say over the Presidential Daily Brief. Signalgate Involvement: Zeihan mentions that as DNI, she testified that the "Signalgate" scandal—where officials discussed tactical military operations on an unsecured platform—was not a serious issue. Broader Geopolitical Context: Zeihan places her actions within a narrative of the Russian government successfully penetrating the highest levels of the US government to limit information flow and influence policy.
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Why is that first fossil worth a million quid? It looks like a huge petrified turd
And wtf is this about:
"Pokemon Fossil Boosters Box - Mystery of the Fossils - Factory Sealed JapaneseOpens in a new window or tab Brand new £45,194.88 or Best Offer Free delivery from Italy 63 watchers"
Collectors are paying £50k for special Pokemon gifts??
Weren't you telling us you sold a crappy old flint for something like that amount the other day ? 😏
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Why is that first fossil worth a million quid? It looks like a huge petrified turd
And wtf is this about:
"Pokemon Fossil Boosters Box - Mystery of the Fossils - Factory Sealed JapaneseOpens in a new window or tab Brand new £45,194.88 or Best Offer Free delivery from Italy 63 watchers"
Collectors are paying £50k for special Pokemon gifts??
Why not look for one yourself? Buying one is a bit meh.
You could have a weekend on the beach at Whitby (avoid the Goth party) or the south coast somewhere.
Alternatively get the Flint Knappers to send you to the Burgess Shale (not as big a location as it sounds).
Leavitt now saying that unconditional surrender means whatever Donald Trump decides it means.
It doesn't actually have to involve a surrender.
This is bloody alice in wonderland and the Red Queen world now.
It disorientates and confuses.
Yet that might be no bad thing as long as your side knows what its aiming to do and how it is trying to do it.
No-one knows what Trump is aiming to do or how, not even Trump.
That's right. There isn't some calculated 'mad man' foreign policy strategy. There isn't any strategy in the normal sense of the word because you need to think beyond the next fortnight to have one of those. This US president is genuinely impulse driven and the governing impulse is "it's about me it's about me it's about me".
Similarly this guy https://bsky.app/profile/robin-j-brooks.bsky.social thinks it takes just one drone attack on a tanker as it passes by Iranian territory to bring the trade to a halt, and there is no way America can stop that single drone attack.
Which implies Hormuz will only be open again if the Iranians want it to be. And that implies in turn a deal between America and whoever is in charge in Iran.
And what happens if everyone just ignores that one drone and sails through ?
Given that Iran has so far been able to sink precisely zero ships it might suggest that Iran's actual military capacity is, once again, being over estimated.
I doubt anyone knows, including the Americans. Houthis have reduced traffic through Suez by 60%. Ships do have an alternative if expensive route round Africa. There is no alternative for Hormuz, so the stakes are higher and maybe more people would be willing to risk it. On the other hand I suspect Iran would maintain a more effective attack capability than a rag-bag insurgency group.
My guess is something similar to the Red Sea in the 6 to 24 month term. Oil and Gas shipments cut by 40% to 70% with some diversion to the Red Sea and some local deals. Food will be landed in Oman or Saudi and trucked to the Gulf States from there. The world will adapt to sourcing less O&G from the Gulf, which would not be ideal for producer states. But no Idea really.
Csn anyone recommend an alternative to Betfair, either an exchange type deal or a regular bookie where one can lay/back against in football markets?
Specifically I want to bet against Cov gaining promotion, ideally laying for a £1000-1500 return, assuming pricing is reasonable. Thanks.
(Betfair have singled my account out for 're-verification' for some reason, and have completely locked me out, despite my sending perfectly good documentation three days ago...)
Smarkets. As a long suffering Cov fan I fear that one is more likely than the pundits think..
Tell me about it... in 2001 I spent ages mid-season trying to find someone that would offer me odds on Angel not scoring a single goal for V*lla until their game against us, when he'd definitely score. Probably should've been worth 50/1 or thereabouts, maybe longer.
Smarkets is no go, sadly. They appear to have zero available liquidity, except on the 'Winner' market, which I don't care about...
It's annoying me to see 1/25 for promotion and think 'Yeah, great, so let us pessimists/realists have a piece of that on the downside!'...
Ah the emotional hedge! I'm prone to that. It's as common as 'wishful thinking' betting on what you want.
Leavitt now saying that unconditional surrender means whatever Donald Trump decides it means.
It doesn't actually have to involve a surrender.
This is bloody alice in wonderland and the Red Queen world now.
That's illustrative of the Trump problem in a nutshell in several areas.
He says both sides of everything at different times, so it may as well be white noise for all the meaning it contains.
Anyone who needs reliability or stability is pivoting away, partly or fully, to manage the risk. And if that means China and the BRICS for economic stability, then so be it.
Is anyone watchingbyhe paralympic opening ceremony? Why do Russia get to compete in the paralympics?
I'm also intrigued by the dancers. It looks like remarkably little thought has gone into what they will actually dom But they're certainly putting the hours in.
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
The Ambassador would not have provided details of any attack - I doubt he'd have known them - so all we had was a build up and speculation, albeit informed, of something which was only "likely" not certain.
I imagine there was probably some analysis done as to how such an attack could unfold and what risks were posed to UK interests - whether Cyprus for example was mentioned directly as a potential target for an Iranian response I've no idea.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
OT. As the clouds gather over Europe and the Middle East a small chink of light. The Telegraph is being bought by German publisher Axel Springer. An old and trusted German publisher based in Hamburg and though it won't happen overnight it won't put up with the crap the Telegraph have been spewing out for the last few years. Honesty might return to the British broadsheets again.
You don't understand how newspapers work
Having actually worked vwith Axel Springer in Hamburg I probably know how they work more than anyone posting on here except of course for Anne and Scampi (AKA Felix) who despite never having heard of them obviously know more.
FT Exclusive: BlackRock has limited withdrawals from one of its flagship private credit funds following a surge in redemption requests, as investors retreat from the asset class and questions about credit quality intensify.
Is anyone watchingbyhe paralympic opening ceremony? Why do Russia get to compete in the paralympics?
I'm also intrigued by the dancers. It looks like remarkably little thought has gone into what they will actually dom But they're certainly putting the hours in.
Not watching but IOC had a vote on it and countries voted 2:1 in favour of Russia being allowed back. Not everyone agrees with Western Europe.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
Indeed, it should be a wake-up call about how bad things have become.
OT. As the clouds gather over Europe and the Middle East a small chink of light. The Telegraph is being bought by German publisher Axel Springer. An old and trusted German publisher based in Hamburg and though it won't happen overnight it won't put up with the crap the Telegraph have been spewing out for the last few years. Honesty might return to the British broadsheets again.
You don't understand how newspapers work
Having actually worked vwith Axel Springer in Hamburg I probably know how they work more than anyone posting on here except of course for Anne and Scampi (AKA Felix) who despite never having heard of them obviously know more.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
Prep crew only work 9-5 / Mon-Fri, so knocked off for the week now.
The son of Smotrich the most evil of all Israeli leaders has been injurerd while invading Lebanon. Surprising considering what Israel have been doing with targetted assassinations there enemies haven't been replying in kind.
FT Exclusive: BlackRock has limited withdrawals from one of its flagship private credit funds following a surge in redemption requests, as investors retreat from the asset class and questions about credit quality intensify.
Can we expect the taxpayers to be bailing out the banks again?
Either of these is quite believable which reflects the softness of the vote for both Labour and the Greens.
Labour FOURTH with FoN
lol
I know this is not a first time, but it's still hilarious. Also surely historic. A government with a landslide result coming FOURTH in polls 18 months later. I doubt we have seen that before in the history of universal UK suffrage - ie ever
The closest analogy is probably Teresa Mays Tories 4th with YouGov 2 years after she 'almost' won a majority
Well, exactly. She didn't win in the first place
Labour have set an unenviable record. The first British party to win a majority at a general election then come FOURTH in polls 18 months later
It's not that amazing. They previously set a record for seats gained despite a low voteshare. A freak of anti-Con sentiment and FPTP. Now that's unwinding and at the same time you have a populist breakthrough on Right and Left. Also FON is a poll of people buying lottery tickets. That methodology is unproven.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
Indeed, it should be a wake-up call about how bad things have become.
The thing is, I have absolutely no idea what the answer is to even starting to fix the shambles this country has turned into!
Maybe there just isn't one? Perhaps the country is broken beyond repair?
FT Exclusive: BlackRock has limited withdrawals from one of its flagship private credit funds following a surge in redemption requests, as investors retreat from the asset class and questions about credit quality intensify.
Can we expect the taxpayers to be bailing out the banks again?
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
You’ve missed the worst bit - the name of the carrier!
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
You’ve missed the worst bit - the name of the carrier!
That Trump repeats calls for Iran's unconditional surrender on same day he's got the defence industrial chiefs round for an emergency meeting on military supplies perfectly sums up his grasp of ends & means.
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Is anyone watchingbyhe paralympic opening ceremony? Why do Russia get to compete in the paralympics?
I'm also intrigued by the dancers. It looks like remarkably little thought has gone into what they will actually dom But they're certainly putting the hours in.
Not watching but IOC had a vote on it and countries voted 2:1 in favour of Russia being allowed back. Not everyone agrees with Western Europe.
Well a separate issue, but that rather illustrates the problem with 'international law' - because most of the world is run by people wuth very different ideas of right and wrong to us.
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
You’ve missed the worst bit - the name of the carrier!
The Charles de Gaulle is based at Toulon and never wanders too far from the Mediterranean so getting it to Cyprus wouldn't be too difficult.
I certainly don't feel "embarrassed" or "humiliated" about any of this - that's why you have allies who can help out. Is anyone suggesting we now permanently station an aircraft carrier in Cyprus? I bet the dock facilities don't exist.
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Auction houses have periodic natural history auctions.
A UK immigration officer accused of working for Chinese intelligence allegedly used his access to Home Office's immigration database to find out information about people from Hong Kong who were living in the UK, including dissidents.
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Is this not back to shops near the British Museum? Or in the posher bits of South Dorset?
If you have cash around (not sure how much) you could buy something very unusual made from Blue John Peak District crystal. The mini-bowl below is about £500, or you can get the natural forms, or jewels. You have to like it, which as ever is the most important thing.
A UK immigration officer accused of working for Chinese intelligence allegedly used his access to Home Office's immigration database to find out information about people from Hong Kong who were living in the UK, including dissidents.
Totally unrelated, but how's that digital ID scheme coming along?
Facebook reminded me of this photo I took a couple of years ago. I’m really quite pleased with it. I don’t think there’s a building of any sort in view
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
Do the domestic US oil and gas markets continue to operate at world prices (subject to longer term fixed price contracts) through the current price hump?
(I'm assuming they do, unless the Govt take a deliberate regulatory action.)
- the Afghan, the petit basset griffon vendeean, the borzoi from Sweden, the wire-haired dachshund, the Ibizan hound from Lithuania, the greyhound from Germany, and the saluki from Poland, plus the pharaoh hound. A fair few champion dogs already in this collection.
And the winner is…Meghan the petit basset griffon from Croatia ! Runner up, the saluki. Third to the Afghan
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
It's quite possible that the answer is neither. Trump could just be doing this because he can, to show that he can.
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
"It's not about the money, it's about sending a message: EVERYTHING BURNS!"
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
It's quite possible that the answer is neither. Trump could just be doing this because he can, to show that he can.
Really. No {extremely daft and dangerous} strategic game?
Has China’s relationship with Iran for secure energy resources and trade, been part of the White House decision to start this war?
You know at least 70% of Iran’s oil goes to China on mates discount terms? Does this fact play a part in Trump wanting to appoint the next Iranian leader and - TOTALLY ON TOPIC POST - have Iran as a puppet regime?
The only thing to realise in this world - behind every story is the real story.
- the Afghan, the petit basset griffon vendeean, the borzoi from Sweden, the wire-haired dachshund, the Ibizan hound from Lithuania, the greyhound from Germany, and the saluki from Poland, plus the pharaoh hound. A fair few champion dogs already in this collection.
And the winner is…Meghan the petit basset griffon from Croatia ! Runner up, the saluki. Third to the Afghan
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
You’ve missed the worst bit - the name of the carrier!
The Charles de Gaulle is based at Toulon and never wanders too far from the Mediterranean so getting it to Cyprus wouldn't be too difficult.
I certainly don't feel "embarrassed" or "humiliated" about any of this - that's why you have allies who can help out. Is anyone suggesting we now permanently station an aircraft carrier in Cyprus? I bet the dock facilities don't exist.
Cyprus is a permanent aircraft carrier (or at least it's supposed to be!).
- the Afghan, the petit basset griffon vendeean, the borzoi from Sweden, the wire-haired dachshund, the Ibizan hound from Lithuania, the greyhound from Germany, and the saluki from Poland, plus the pharaoh hound. A fair few champion dogs already in this collection.
And the winner is…Meghan the petit basset griffon from Croatia ! Runner up, the saluki. Third to the Afghan
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
Whilst I think you are right overall, do you not see Rand Paul perhaps voting for impeachment given his increasing hostility to Trump?
If the war continues, then he's one of the Senators with the most obviously evolving spine!
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
I could not trust Trump further than I could throw the fat fuck.
In a WWII analogy if Iran are the Nazis, then Trump is not Roosevelt, he is Stalin.
He needs opposing for his own flaws and the sooner he is gone the better, but on this one fight the enemy of my enemy applies so good luck to him on this and this alone.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
That's what allies are for.
Jesus Christ
Grow up.
There are enough UK aircraft there and have been for weeks to protect Cyprus 5 times over.
The son of Smotrich the most evil of all Israeli leaders has been injurerd while invading Lebanon. Surprising considering what Israel have been doing with targetted assassinations there enemies haven't been replying in kind.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
That's what allies are for.
Jesus Christ
Grow up.
There are enough UK aircraft there and have been for weeks to protect Cyprus 5 times over.
I mean that's demonstrably not true, otherwise there wouldn't have been that drone strike.
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Ange and Giorgia are going to be a formidable left right combination leading Europe in a new age of positive feminism against the dark powers of US and Israel.
The commentary from Washington today has been astonishingly stupid.
I think we will be looking at a large Democrat majority in the House, and it is even possible that the American people might vote for enough Democrat Senators to allow impeachment. What odds are being offered on Trump being forced from office?
It is certainly what this fiasco deserves.
There is essentially no chance that enough Senate seats could fall that would allow for Trump's impeachment.
Right now, the Senate is 53-47.
Only 33 seats are up for election this year, of which 13 are Democrat, and 20 Republican.
If you assume that States with a partisan lean of 6 points (i.e. a 12 point gap in the vote last time around) were to the fall to the Democrats (which would be an incredible result for them), then you would see them gain the following:
Alaska: not a bad shout, Mary Pelouta is popular and only just missed out in the House race in 2024, and the Republicans are likely to do worse than then. Florida: that's a real toughy; it's been becoming Redder and Redder over time. But I put in there for completeness. Iowa: it's possible. Obama won it. And it'll be open because Joni Ernst is retiring. But I'd want decent odds. Maine: Ms Collins luck will run out this year. North Carolina: probably a Democrat gain. Ohio: like with Iowa, it's possible. Sherrod Brown is a very strong Democratic candidate who lost by just 3.5% in 2024, while Trump ran away with the State. Texas: well, the Democrats did the smart thing and chose an electable candidate. And the Republicans look likely to pick Paxton. Nate Silver thinks this makes Texas 50/50.
And that's it... After that, you start looking at States with big Republican leans. And while it's possible one ofthem could end up falling in one way or another (perhaps Louisiana, if the Republicans Primary Bill Cassidy, and then the Dems decide to sit the race out and he wins as an Independent?), it's not likely.
So... on an incredible night for the Dems, you could see them picking up 7.
But, really, only 2 are high likelihood (Maine and North Carolina), then there are 2 or 3 that are 50/50 at best (Alaska, maybe Ohio and Texas). And then it's really distant shots.
+7 gets the Dems to 54 Senators. And yes, you might get Lisa Murkowski voting for Trump's removal, but that's probably about it.
But...you are assuming those Republican Seantors who weren't up for election but have seen the Democrats surge in the House and get the majority in the Senate are going to sit back and let Trump run through to his end of term without trying to do something to save their arses in 2028.
It's worth pointing out that Trump's average favourability in polling is 43%, which is still better than Biden and a smidge better than Trump 1. The assumption on here is that everyone in the US hates Trump now but it's really not the case. I would suggest the polling points to an average mid-terms (e.g. Dems take back the House but not the Senate)
Mark, Realclearpolitics is currently giving an average of 43.4%/54.6% with a huge spread of results, so you can cherry pick your pollsters and draw just about any conclusion you like. The trouble is of course that there is no equivalent of the BPC in the US so even joke pollsters like Trafalgar get thrown into the mix. Even amongst the more familiar names it is hard to know who you can really rely on. I think Quinnipiac are pretty kosher but I'd struggle to name a second I would place great reliance on.
I think all you can say for sure is that the trend has been unfavorable for Trump for some time and that the favorability gap is big, but not necessarily big enough to suggest a wipe out in November.
There's a lot of room for guesswork, and if I had to guess it would be along the same lines as Gareth - a good night for Democrats, but not dissimilar to normal midterm results.
That's pretty much where I'm sitting.
Assuming that the Iran war ends before it sends petrol prices spiralling out of control, you'd expect the Democrats to regain the House, and to pickup North Carolina and Maine. You'd also reckon they have a decent chance in Alaska. With outside possibilities being Ohio and (if the Republicans pick Paxton) Texas. The most likely outcome is probably Dems +2 in the Senate, but it's not impossible they could either fall short in North Carolina, or for Ms Collins to escape political gravity once more, or even for them to drop one or both of Michigan and Georgia.
That said, if it does go on, and energy prices spike, then it could be an ugly night for the Republicans.
But, will HMS Dragon get to Cyprus before the Democrats regain the House?
What a complete embarrassment and humiliation to have the French (yes the FRENCH) navy protecting British interests on Cyprus because we are incapable of doing so ourselves.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
That's what allies are for.
Jesus Christ
Grow up.
There are enough UK aircraft there and have been for weeks to protect Cyprus 5 times over.
I mean that's demonstrably not true, otherwise there wouldn't have been that drone strike.
Worth considering that no defence system is foolproof. The UAE have invested in one of the most advanced air defence systems in the world. They were attacked over 1000 missiles and drones and shot down 94% of them. That still means 60 got through. Same with Israel and the Iron Dome. No system currently in existence can stop every attack.
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
I could not trust Trump further than I could throw the fat fuck.
In a WWII analogy if Iran are the Nazis, then Trump is not Roosevelt, he is Stalin.
He needs opposing for his own flaws and the sooner he is gone the better, but on this one fight the enemy of my enemy applies so good luck to him on this and this alone.
Being Realistic though, the winner here is going to be China, isn’t it.
The main prize is keeping their cheap oil. And what follows is an awful lot of infrastructure projects, selling things and other business opportunity in Iran for China’s businesses. It’s very hard to see any win for US from this war. Just abiding downsides on costs and reputational damage for the Trump Reich (and long beyond) once it’s over.
China can end this war whenever they want. A bit of military build up and activity in the black ditch and a national call to give blood, and I assure you, Trump instantly accepts what he calls Irans Unconditional Surrender and Proclaims the Supreme Victory for the allied command {with associated merch and Rock Video’s telling the story}.
These aircraft should not be allowed to land on British Soil.
Over 1000 civilians dead already after illegal war started by the US and Israel - and all this with no vote in the UK parliament about our role.
It's got none of the ingredients that makes an uneven war like this palatable,. Primarily there isn't a single leader who can be demonised like Sadam or to a lesser extent Gadaffi and the US and Israel are the least attractive bullies in the world. To make it worse Hegseth personally has behaved disgustingly
These aircraft should not be allowed to land on British Soil.
Over 1000 civilians dead already after illegal war started by the US and Israel - and all this with no vote in the UK parliament about our role.
It's got none of the ingredients that makes an uneven war like this palatable,. Primarily there isn't a single leader who can be demonised like Sadam or to a lesser extent Gadaffi and the US and Israel are the least attractive bullies in the world. To make it worse Hegseth personally has behaved disgustingly
Well there was one, but he was liquidated on day one
Another leftist expresses scepticism about the war.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
Its not a left versus right issue, its a wrong versus right one.
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
In your view - and you do have views, I’ve see you express them on this blog - is Trump in this for human rights for Iranian’s, or his eyes full of oil barrels and dollar signs?
I could not trust Trump further than I could throw the fat fuck.
In a WWII analogy if Iran are the Nazis, then Trump is not Roosevelt, he is Stalin.
He needs opposing for his own flaws and the sooner he is gone the better, but on this one fight the enemy of my enemy applies so good luck to him on this and this alone.
Being Realistic though, the winner here is going to be China, isn’t it.
The main prize is keeping their cheap oil. And what follows is an awful lot of infrastructure projects, selling things and other business opportunity in Iran for China’s businesses. It’s very hard to see any win for US from this war. Just abiding downsides on costs and reputational damage for the Trump Reich (and long beyond) once it’s over.
China can end this war whenever they want. A bit of military build up and activity in the black ditch and a national call to give blood, and I assure you, Trump instantly accepts what he calls Irans Unconditional Surrender and Proclaims the Supreme Victory for the allied command {with associated merch and Rock Video’s telling the story}.
The winning move is not to play.
One of the things I have learned from being here is that if there is something you want, fighting a war for it is always more expensive than paying cash on the nail.
Do the domestic US oil and gas markets continue to operate at world prices (subject to longer term fixed price contracts) through the current price hump?
(I'm assuming they do, unless the Govt take a deliberate regulatory action.)
Yes.
Or at the very least they are highly correlated.
The key thing to understand here is that while the US produces as much oil as it consumes, it doesn't actually consume the oil it produces.
This is obvioiusly a simplification. It does consume a lot of the oil it produces. But...
Most of the growth in US oil production has come from tight formations in the Midland Basin, and is really light. US refiners aren't setup to process that; they're setup to process heavy, sour crude. So, lots of US oil is exported to Europe, while the US (historically) imports Canadian oil (and to a lesser extent Saudi and now Venezuelan oil).
Those refineries can't be rejigged easily. It would (a) take six months (during which time they're not refining crude), and (b) would mean those refineries would make a lot less money.
So, US consumers are going to feel an impact from the rising global oil price.
I'm making nice money from my flints, young and old, and I want to spend some
I've run out of room in my tiny flat to put antiques, or Georgian glasses, or antique Spode, or Russian silver spoons, etc
So I might be a really beautiful fossil. I have a Murano chalice which would really cradle a fossil exquisitely. Where the fuck does one buy great fossils? Willing to spend a couple of grand or more
Do you really want competition in the fossil department?
Comments
Russia sharing intelligence on US positions with Iran, sources tell CBS News
"Sources have told the BBC's US partner, CBS News, that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions to Iran.
It cites three unnamed sources familiar with the matter, including a senior US official it says has direct knowledge.
The Washington Post initially reported that Russia is providing intelligence on US positions, citing three unnamed officials.
Russian state media reported earlier that Vladimir Putin's spokesperson said Russia was in "dialogue" with Iranian leadership.
Reuters reports that the Kremlin declined to provide details when asked by reporters whether Moscow was helping Tehran."
From the BBC's livestream https://www.bbc.com/news/live/ceqvwrydzpqt
Why is that first fossil worth a million quid? It looks like a huge petrified turd
And wtf is this about:
"Pokemon Fossil Boosters Box - Mystery of the Fossils - Factory Sealed JapaneseOpens in a new window or tab
Brand new
£45,194.88
or Best Offer
Free delivery
from Italy
63 watchers"
Collectors are paying £50k for special Pokemon gifts??
After he's pulled the rug on Europe.
Utterly ludicrous.
But Israel and the US military do know what they want to do and how to do it.
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-889048
There are one or two, like the UAE pipe to Fujairah, but nothing major.
Tulsi Gabbard is openly described as a Russian asset by American commentators and, so far as I know, she has made no attempt to prosecute them for libel. And, of course, she controls the flow of intel to Trump. Nothing in Trumpworld would surprise me.
White album with a very low serial number?
Smarkets is no go, sadly. They appear to have zero available liquidity, except on the 'Winner' market, which I don't care about...
It's annoying me to see 1/25 for promotion and think 'Yeah, great, so let us pessimists/realists have a piece of that on the downside!'...
Here are the key points regarding Peter Zeihan's commentary on Tulsi Gabbard:
Director of National Intelligence Role: Zeihan states that in a Trump administration (as of his March/May 2025 analysis), Gabbard was appointed Director of National Intelligence.
Purging Intelligence Experts: Zeihan alleges that Gabbard has "gutted" intelligence bureaus, specifically removing Russian experts from top to bottom, which he suggests undermines U.S. counter-intelligence efforts.
Accusations of Russian Alignment: Zeihan frequently refers to her as a "useful idiot" for Russia or a "traitor" whose worldview is almost identical to Vladimir Putin's.
Influence on Intelligence: Zeihan claims she has final say over the Presidential Daily Brief.
Signalgate Involvement: Zeihan mentions that as DNI, she testified that the "Signalgate" scandal—where officials discussed tactical military operations on an unsecured platform—was not a serious issue.
Broader Geopolitical Context: Zeihan places her actions within a narrative of the Russian government successfully penetrating the highest levels of the US government to limit information flow and influence policy.
How about a stunning Moroccan trilobite?
https://news.sky.com/video/share-13516222
You could have a weekend on the beach at Whitby (avoid the Goth party) or the south coast somewhere.
Alternatively get the Flint Knappers to send you to the Burgess Shale (not as big a location as it sounds).
My guess is something similar to the Red Sea in the 6 to 24 month term. Oil and Gas shipments cut by 40% to 70% with some diversion to the Red Sea and some local deals. Food will be landed in Oman or Saudi and trucked to the Gulf States from there. The world will adapt to sourcing less O&G from the Gulf, which would not be ideal for producer states. But no Idea really.
He says both sides of everything at different times, so it may as well be white noise for all the meaning it contains.
Anyone who needs reliability or stability is pivoting away, partly or fully, to manage the risk. And if that means China and the BRICS for economic stability, then so be it.
Why do Russia get to compete in the paralympics?
I'm also intrigued by the dancers. It looks like remarkably little thought has gone into what they will actually dom But they're certainly putting the hours in.
Prime Minister of Italy, Giorgia Meloni:
Italy will not enter into a direct conflict against Iran. Our absolute priority is de-escalation and peace, not fueling a regional fire that would be devastating for everyone.
The air bases on our territory are used for logistics and support, not as launch platforms for offensive actions without prior democratic debate.
We will not allow ourselves to be dragged into a spiral of violence that has no clear political objective of peace.
https://x.com/__Amoxicillin_/status/2029921837610848743
I imagine there was probably some analysis done as to how such an attack could unfold and what risks were posed to UK interests - whether Cyprus for example was mentioned directly as a potential target for an Iranian response I've no idea.
I can see advantages in the current situation, but I'm not sure if we will notice how much they help.
Do we expect a change of direction on the tax setup about the North Sea, as a strategic risk management move?
https://x.com/FT/status/2029984339681780095
FT Exclusive: BlackRock has limited withdrawals from one of its flagship private credit funds following a surge in redemption requests, as investors retreat from the asset class and questions about credit quality intensify.
The depths to which this country has sunk under Labour and Conservative governments tells you everything you need to know about their current pitiful polling levels...
Maybe there just isn't one? Perhaps the country is broken beyond repair?
He was an evil dictator, who spread hate for decades.
He inspired people to attempt to murder Brits and he referred to our country as Little Satan.
Good that someone has finally taken out the trash.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_aircraft_carrier_Charles_de_Gaulle
@EdwardGLuce
That Trump repeats calls for Iran's unconditional surrender on same day he's got the defence industrial chiefs round for an emergency meeting on military supplies perfectly sums up his grasp of ends & means.
https://x.com/EdwardGLuce/status/2030007587400196608
And sadly most of Europe is on the wrong side.
Step away from Europe and not just America and Israel, but the Iranian public, Iranian diaspora and Gulf states want to see regime change in Iran.
Sadly Europe has become so scared of its own shadow that it can not be taken seriously anymore. Which includes the UK under this Government.
I certainly don't feel "embarrassed" or "humiliated" about any of this - that's why you have allies who can help out. Is anyone suggesting we now permanently station an aircraft carrier in Cyprus? I bet the dock facilities don't exist.
https://x.com/KristenhCNN/status/2030004003145183609
Condoleezza Rice was just seen walking into the White House.
If you have cash around (not sure how much) you could buy something very unusual made from Blue John Peak District crystal. The mini-bowl below is about £500, or you can get the natural forms, or jewels. You have to like it, which as ever is the most important thing.
"Why the British right need to learn to love Europe", by Max Hastings and Friedrich Merz.
my entry for the horse comp!.
Do the domestic US oil and gas markets continue to operate at world prices (subject to longer term fixed price contracts) through the current price hump?
(I'm assuming they do, unless the Govt take a deliberate regulatory action.)
- the Afghan, the petit basset griffon vendeean, the borzoi from Sweden, the wire-haired dachshund, the Ibizan hound from Lithuania, the greyhound from Germany, and the saluki from Poland, plus the pharaoh hound. A fair few champion dogs already in this collection.
And the winner is…Meghan the petit basset griffon from Croatia ! Runner up, the saluki. Third to the Afghan
Has China’s relationship with Iran for secure energy resources and trade, been part of the White House decision to start this war?
You know at least 70% of Iran’s oil goes to China on mates discount terms? Does this fact play a part in Trump wanting to appoint the next Iranian leader and - TOTALLY ON TOPIC POST - have Iran as a puppet regime?
The only thing to realise in this world - behind every story is the real story.
In a WWII analogy if Iran are the Nazis, then Trump is not Roosevelt, he is Stalin.
He needs opposing for his own flaws and the sooner he is gone the better, but on this one fight the enemy of my enemy applies so good luck to him on this and this alone.
Grow up.
There are enough UK aircraft there and have been for weeks to protect Cyprus 5 times over.
The main prize is keeping their cheap oil. And what follows is an awful lot of infrastructure projects, selling things and other business opportunity in Iran for China’s businesses. It’s very hard to see any win for US from this war. Just abiding downsides on costs and reputational damage for the Trump Reich (and long beyond) once it’s over.
China can end this war whenever they want. A bit of military build up and activity in the black ditch and a national call to give blood, and I assure you, Trump instantly accepts what he calls Irans Unconditional Surrender and Proclaims the Supreme Victory for the allied command {with associated merch and Rock Video’s telling the story}.
https://x.com/zackpolanski/status/2030022643412324461
These aircraft should not be allowed to land on British Soil.
Over 1000 civilians dead already after illegal war started by the US and Israel - and all this with no vote in the UK parliament about our role.
Well, according to this other random website, no, it's not true.
https://www.timesnownews.com/world/us/us-buzz/barron-trump-buy-oil-investmet-purchase-iran-war-viral-claims-fact-checked-article-153773041
One of the things I have learned from being here is that if there is something you want, fighting a war for it is always more expensive than paying cash on the nail.
Or at the very least they are highly correlated.
The key thing to understand here is that while the US produces as much oil as it consumes, it doesn't actually consume the oil it produces.
This is obvioiusly a simplification. It does consume a lot of the oil it produces. But...
Most of the growth in US oil production has come from tight formations in the Midland Basin, and is really light. US refiners aren't setup to process that; they're setup to process heavy, sour crude. So, lots of US oil is exported to Europe, while the US (historically) imports Canadian oil (and to a lesser extent Saudi and now Venezuelan oil).
Those refineries can't be rejigged easily. It would (a) take six months (during which time they're not refining crude), and (b) would mean those refineries would make a lot less money.
So, US consumers are going to feel an impact from the rising global oil price.