“Thinned skinned Rishi is clearly angry that information that it was clearly in the public interest to be released has come into the public domain.
Rather than ruefully and genuinely admit he and his wife should have done things differently he demands that the state engages in a witch hunt. Everyone else is to blame but the pair of them I guess.
Shows the stature of the man really. He's proved himself to be unfit for high office.”
When you unite the FT and the DM readers against you, you’ve got a serious problem.
Johnson will be delighted as he manifests in Ukraine seeking a slice of vicarious war kudos. He survives all of his scandals and now sees the main alternative to his leadership brought low by his own. I think this man has made a pact with Lucifer. The luck is too extreme to be explained any other way.
He's like Punch. Even when the devil comes for him, he'll probably manage to bash him on the bonce and say 'that's the way to do it!'.
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
That's clearly false, and you demonstrably know nothing about this subject if you think that's true.
Do enlighten me. Or am I expected to take this pathetic riposte complete with split infinitive as the last word on the matter?
Well you can look into the concept of the nuclear umbrella for starters. This concept covers a range of formal and informal agreements to provide security against catastrophic attack by a mutual enemy.
Whilst you're at it, you might want to look up what a split infinitive is. Not that I mind doing it, it's perfectly fine to not avoid doing it, but I didn't in the above post.
There would seem to be little point in looking up a concept that isn't in any way applicable to what I wrote, which remains completely true. We have no agreements with any other countries to use our nuclear deterrent on their behalf, indeed such a notion would undermine the entire point of us having it.
Rather ridiculous given Tugendhat is a Remainer unlike Sunak and not even in the Cabinet.
Wallace should be in the top 3 to succeed Boris alongside Truss and Sunak, not Tugendhat
Is the Leaver/Remainer thing still a dynamic though? I get the impression that the Tories are now seeing Brexit as something of an embarrassment best forgotten about. (The last strained attempt to make a virtue out of it was the stuff with Rees-Mogg and The Sun but I doubt there'll be any repetition of that - just too silly.)
Of course it is, given the vast majority of Tory voters let alone Tory members are still strongly pro Brexit and the Brexit deal we have. That will continue to be the case for at least a generation
You live in a world of make believe
I am in favour of brexit but want a deal that draws the UK - EU closer together especially on trade
You are a Remain voter who voted for Blair and has never been a great fan of Boris.
That rather proves my point, you are hardly typical of most current Tory voters and Tory members
"current Tory voters" isn't a big enough bloc to win a general election.
I'm puzzled by the the decision to keep non-dom status (controversial) but stop avoiding tax on foreign income in the UK (uncontroversial).
The non-dom status has significant inheritance tax advantages.
Yep. They haven’t quashed this story. Until the Sunaks fully normalise their tax status (at huge cost to themselves - esp re inheritance tax) the knives will be out and he’ll be bought down sooner or later. It’s an untenable position.
Rishi either hasn’t realised this, or intends to put up a stand and die on the hill of tax avoidance. If you’re gonna be a British minister, especially CoftE or PM, you have to be whiter then white on this stuff.
Silly man.
From the DM
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
I'm with HYUFD. In fact, I think that the Tories should base their next election campaign on how much pride modern Tories take in being the heirs to Franco and Pinochet. Please.
Surely how much money the Tories can take from their voters pockets and put in the pockets of themselves and their patrons. With the important caveat that if you feel poor after they have taken your money then its your fault for being too woke.
Rather ridiculous given Tugendhat is a Remainer unlike Sunak and not even in the Cabinet.
Wallace should be in the top 3 to succeed Boris alongside Truss and Sunak, not Tugendhat
Is the Leaver/Remainer thing still a dynamic though? I get the impression that the Tories are now seeing Brexit as something of an embarrassment best forgotten about. (The last strained attempt to make a virtue out of it was the stuff with Rees-Mogg and The Sun but I doubt there'll be any repetition of that - just too silly.)
Of course it is, given the vast majority of Tory voters let alone Tory members are still strongly pro Brexit and the Brexit deal we have. That will continue to be the case for at least a generation
You live in a world of make believe
I am in favour of brexit but want a deal that draws the UK - EU closer together especially on trade
You are a Remain voter who voted for Blair and has never been a great fan of Boris.
That rather proves my point, you are hardly typical of most current Tory voters and Tory members
Mate, you are a fan of Franco. I think G is more in tune with Conservative voters than you are.
The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.
I never said I was a fan of his anyway, just he did keep Spain together
If you are not a fan, why are you so confident the average Tory is a fan?
I was a Remainer in 2016, if anything I am on the moderate wing of the Tory membership now in terms of views of the EU.
BigG is also far closer to Starmer Labour or Davey's LDs than the current Tory leadership, just he has not admitted it to himself yet
I voted remain also but the idea you are a moderate conservative is for the birds
At least HYUFD doesn't pretend unlike you. Why don't you leave him alone?
BigG strikes me as an exceptionally moderate and mild-mannered Conservative. In the same manner as (say) Southam for Labour. Both have their own angles and opinions on events, but neither have ever struck me as extreme.
He didn't get to be big G without coertion and battle plans.
South Wales has long felt threatened, and allegedly guests at Big G castle have been served leek soup with a clear Northern buttery taste.
As I understand it he's prepared to snub a nose, maybe two, to seize the lands under the G mark.
I'm puzzled by the the decision to keep non-dom status (controversial) but stop avoiding tax on foreign income in the UK (uncontroversial).
The non-dom status has significant inheritance tax advantages.
Yep. They haven’t quashed this story. Until the Sunaks fully normalise their tax status (at huge cost to themselves - esp re inheritance tax) the knives will be out and he’ll be bought down sooner or later. It’s an untenable position.
Rishi either hasn’t realised this, or intends to put up a stand and die on the hill of tax avoidance. If you’re gonna be a British minister, especially CoftE or PM, you have to be whiter then white on this stuff.
Silly man.
From the DM
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
I am not sure what a soft landing looks like in this case. He can't be given responsibility over anything that has a bearing on taxation, immigration, business, or nationality issues, so that rules out most cabinet posts except possibly health. He can't be given leadership over a task force or a public body for the same reason.
So the chancellor's wife still doesn't consider the UK her permanent home. If it was the chancellor himself he'd be toast. As it's his wife instead I'd probably let him off. But many won't.
Wow. I had not realized how horrible Everton's line up of opponents until the end of the season. Leicester twice, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal. Hard to see how they get the points to stay up.
Liverpool’s next three opponents:
Man City Man United Everton
I’ve not really followed much of the football this season, but I think tonight’s result probably decides the league. Just paid up the PPV to watch the match.
I'm puzzled by the the decision to keep non-dom status (controversial) but stop avoiding tax on foreign income in the UK (uncontroversial).
The non-dom status has significant inheritance tax advantages.
Yep. They haven’t quashed this story. Until the Sunaks fully normalise their tax status (at huge cost to themselves - esp re inheritance tax) the knives will be out and he’ll be bought down sooner or later. It’s an untenable position.
Rishi either hasn’t realised this, or intends to put up a stand and die on the hill of tax avoidance. If you’re gonna be a British minister, especially CoftE or PM, you have to be whiter then white on this stuff.
Silly man.
From the DM
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
I am not sure what a soft landing looks like in this case. He can't be given responsibility over anything that has a bearing on taxation, immigration, business, or nationality issues, so that rules out most cabinet posts except possibly health. He can't be given leadership over a task force or a public body for the same reason.
I think he will leave politics. A soft landing is resign to pursue other interests in a month or so
Here's a thought: what if no Ukraine and a Sunak driven vonc? Would Johnson have detonated this bomb to collapse the vonc and buy a year's safety?
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
That's clearly false, and you demonstrably know nothing about this subject if you think that's true.
Do enlighten me. Or am I expected to take this pathetic riposte complete with split infinitive as the last word on the matter?
Well you can look into the concept of the nuclear umbrella for starters. This concept covers a range of formal and informal agreements to provide security against catastrophic attack by a mutual enemy.
Whilst you're at it, you might want to look up what a split infinitive is. Not that I mind doing it, it's perfectly fine to not avoid doing it, but I didn't in the above post.
There would seem to be little point in looking up a concept that isn't in any way applicable to what I wrote, which remains completely true. We have no agreements with any other countries to use our nuclear deterrent on their behalf, indeed such a notion would undermine the entire point of us having it.
Turnout at 17h is 65%, down four points on 2014, when it was 69.4%. The projected final turnout is 76% (projection Ifop), which would be only two points down on 2017.
Paris's notable underperformance continues, with a 17h turnout of 52.2%, twelve points on the 64.5% of 2017.…
But again, beyond Paris, it doesn't seem Macron areas are uniformly underperforming or that Le Pen areas are uniformly overperforming..
I'm puzzled by the the decision to keep non-dom status (controversial) but stop avoiding tax on foreign income in the UK (uncontroversial).
The non-dom status has significant inheritance tax advantages.
Yep. They haven’t quashed this story. Until the Sunaks fully normalise their tax status (at huge cost to themselves - esp re inheritance tax) the knives will be out and he’ll be bought down sooner or later. It’s an untenable position.
Rishi either hasn’t realised this, or intends to put up a stand and die on the hill of tax avoidance. If you’re gonna be a British minister, especially CoftE or PM, you have to be whiter then white on this stuff.
Silly man.
From the DM
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
I think Rishi's is the most spectacular political self-demolition I've ever seen. His leadership ambitions are surely in tatters - even the Tories wouldn't risk someone with such tin ears. Stressing out all the way to his swimming pool, gym and billions. Calamitous.
I'm puzzled by the the decision to keep non-dom status (controversial) but stop avoiding tax on foreign income in the UK (uncontroversial).
The non-dom status has significant inheritance tax advantages.
Yep. They haven’t quashed this story. Until the Sunaks fully normalise their tax status (at huge cost to themselves - esp re inheritance tax) the knives will be out and he’ll be bought down sooner or later. It’s an untenable position.
Rishi either hasn’t realised this, or intends to put up a stand and die on the hill of tax avoidance. If you’re gonna be a British minister, especially CoftE or PM, you have to be whiter then white on this stuff.
Silly man.
From the DM
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
I think Rishi's is the most spectacular political self-demolition I've ever seen. His leadership ambitions are surely in tatters - even the Tories wouldn't risk someone with such tin ears. Stressing out all the way to his swimming pool, gym and billions. Calamitous.
I don’t think Rishi’s “political” smarts have really been put to the test (as opposed to his intellectual smarts) until the Spring Statement and the row over his wife’s tax status. On both he has significantly underperformed. There is a lot to be said for the hard graft of standing in multiple elections, (council, then Parliament, for example) in honing skills. Being parachuted into a safe seat, then being rapidly promoted hasn’t equipped him well.
Turnout at 17h is 65%, down four points on 2014, when it was 69.4%. The projected final turnout is 76% (projection Ifop), which would be only two points down on 2017.
Paris's notable underperformance continues, with a 17h turnout of 52.2%, twelve points on the 64.5% of 2017.…
But again, beyond Paris, it doesn't seem Macron areas are uniformly underperforming or that Le Pen areas are uniformly overperforming..
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
Mate, if you think Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and there's no response from NATO you're in cloud cuckoo land.
Turnout at 17h is 65%, down four points on 2014, when it was 69.4%. The projected final turnout is 76% (projection Ifop), which would be only two points down on 2017.
Paris's notable underperformance continues, with a 17h turnout of 52.2%, twelve points on the 64.5% of 2017.…
But again, beyond Paris, it doesn't seem Macron areas are uniformly underperforming or that Le Pen areas are uniformly overperforming..
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
Mate, if you think Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and there's no response from NATO you're in cloud cuckoo land.
if the russkies nuked Berlin would the French risk Paris ? Personally I think they wouldnt
I'm puzzled by the the decision to keep non-dom status (controversial) but stop avoiding tax on foreign income in the UK (uncontroversial).
The non-dom status has significant inheritance tax advantages.
Yep. They haven’t quashed this story. Until the Sunaks fully normalise their tax status (at huge cost to themselves - esp re inheritance tax) the knives will be out and he’ll be bought down sooner or later. It’s an untenable position.
Rishi either hasn’t realised this, or intends to put up a stand and die on the hill of tax avoidance. If you’re gonna be a British minister, especially CoftE or PM, you have to be whiter then white on this stuff.
Silly man.
From the DM
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
I am not sure what a soft landing looks like in this case. He can't be given responsibility over anything that has a bearing on taxation, immigration, business, or nationality issues, so that rules out most cabinet posts except possibly health. He can't be given leadership over a task force or a public body for the same reason.
I think he will leave politics. A soft landing is resign to pursue other interests in a month or so
Here's a thought: what if no Ukraine and a Sunak driven vonc? Would Johnson have detonated this bomb to collapse the vonc and buy a year's safety?
Never mind that. One of Ballydoyle's Derby prospects, Waterville, is about to run at the Curragh (though is uneasy in the betting). Also in the field is Downing Street.
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
Mate, if you think Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and there's no response from NATO you're in cloud cuckoo land.
if the russkies nuked Berlin would the French risk Paris ? Personally I think they wouldnt
I think yes. The British would clearly risk London though, as we have done twice before.
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
Mate, if you think Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and there's no response from NATO you're in cloud cuckoo land.
if the russkies nuked Berlin would the French risk Paris ? Personally I think they wouldnt
If the Russians could nuke Berlin with impunity, who in their right mind thinks Paris would be safe?
In the the last thread the question of predictions of military matters was raised. NLAW was mentioned.
It is worth considering why some predictions of the usefulness of such weapons were wrong.
When handheld anti-tank weapons were invented, it seemed that the age of the tank was over. One man, with such a weapon could reliably push an hole through a thickness of armour plate that barely the largest battleship could carry.
Yet the panzerfaust didn't stop the T-34s and IS-2s of the Red Army. Hundreds were fired for each tank destroyed.
Again, when the anti-tank missile revolution came about in the 60's, the tank was doomed. Again. For a while it seemed it might be true - the Israeli's lost a lot of tanks in 1973 war.
When in more modern conflicts, US, UK and Israeli tanks were faced with the latest generation of tandem warhead systems, they did well - many, many rounds fired and few tanks destroyed.
The reasons? Partly that the US, UK and Israeli tanks had the very latest armour. Specifically designed to defeat the tandem warhead weapons. Also that their infantry worked with their armoured units in the manner that was first worked out in WWI - tanks need infantry to survive as infantry needs tanks to back them up.
What is happening in Ukraine? Why is it apparently different from recent Western experience?
- The weapons this time are empathising top attack, where the armour of all tanks is thinest. They do so automatically. - The Ukranians are using buildings as well, apparently, to shoot downwards onto Russian armoured vehicles. The Chechens did this, during their war, incidentally and destroyed many Russian vehicles. - Some of the weapons soft launch, making them easier to use inside buildings. - The Russians, from videos *from their own side*, are not always using infantry to support tanks. They are driving into battles and the infantry gets out to fight after the battle has started. At least some of the time. - A major difference between Western armoured vehicles and Russian designs is the density or the weapons inside and the protection for them. Western tanks and armoured vehicles spend size and weight on protecting the crew from the ammunition and fuel carried. The Russian doctrine emphasised small size and weight of the overall vehicle. So Russian tanks and personnel carriers explode and burn much more easily when hit and with worse consequences for the crews.
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
Mate, if you think Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and there's no response from NATO you're in cloud cuckoo land.
if the russkies nuked Berlin would the French risk Paris ? Personally I think they wouldnt
I think yes. The British would clearly risk London though, as we have done twice before.
I suspect neither the British nor the French would have much say in the matter. The US would aim to obliterate Russia and hope that (per @rcs1000) much of the Russian nuclear arsenal would fail to work.
Never mind that. One of Ballydoyle's Derby prospects, Waterville, is about to run at the Curragh (though is uneasy in the betting). Also in the field is Downing Street.
Turnout at 17h is 65%, down four points on 2014, when it was 69.4%. The projected final turnout is 76% (projection Ifop), which would be only two points down on 2017.
Paris's notable underperformance continues, with a 17h turnout of 52.2%, twelve points on the 64.5% of 2017.…
But again, beyond Paris, it doesn't seem Macron areas are uniformly underperforming or that Le Pen areas are uniformly overperforming..
Turnout at 17h is 65%, down four points on 2014, when it was 69.4%. The projected final turnout is 76% (projection Ifop), which would be only two points down on 2017.
Paris's notable underperformance continues, with a 17h turnout of 52.2%, twelve points on the 64.5% of 2017.…
But again, beyond Paris, it doesn't seem Macron areas are uniformly underperforming or that Le Pen areas are uniformly overperforming..
I normally finish up as 7, and I have failed - I think just once though.
Wordle I've never failed and have a suprising number of 2s - above my 3s.
What is your Quordle strategy? I get tempted to finish off words, since I've got to do them sooner or later, but feel I ought to be concentrating in the early lines on covering the alphabet, and then homing in. I usually get it, but often only ort 8 or 9.
Btw, as we await the French results, can I recommend Edward Stourton’s recent podcast on French/Algerian political history “The Shadow of Algiers” - it really is worth 45 mins of anyones time;
I normally finish up as 7, and I have failed - I think just once though.
Wordle I've never failed and have a suprising number of 2s - above my 3s.
What is your Quordle strategy? I get tempted to finish off words, since I've got to do them sooner or later, but feel I ought to be concentrating in the early lines on covering the alphabet, and then homing in. I usually get it, but often only ort 8 or 9.
First three words to cover 12 common letters for me. Whenever I get tempted to guess a word on try 2 or 3 it ends badly.
Question: why do we have stag parties and hen parties? Stags and hens don’t mate. Surely it should be stag parties and doe parties. Or hen parties and…
Rather ridiculous given Tugendhat is a Remainer unlike Sunak and not even in the Cabinet.
Wallace should be in the top 3 to succeed Boris alongside Truss and Sunak, not Tugendhat
Is the Leaver/Remainer thing still a dynamic though? I get the impression that the Tories are now seeing Brexit as something of an embarrassment best forgotten about. (The last strained attempt to make a virtue out of it was the stuff with Rees-Mogg and The Sun but I doubt there'll be any repetition of that - just too silly.)
Of course it is, given the vast majority of Tory voters let alone Tory members are still strongly pro Brexit and the Brexit deal we have. That will continue to be the case for at least a generation
You live in a world of make believe
I am in favour of brexit but want a deal that draws the UK - EU closer together especially on trade
You are a Remain voter who voted for Blair and has never been a great fan of Boris.
That rather proves my point, you are hardly typical of most current Tory voters and Tory members
Mate, you are a fan of Franco. I think G is more in tune with Conservative voters than you are.
The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.
I never said I was a fan of his anyway, just he did keep Spain together
If you are not a fan, why are you so confident the average Tory is a fan?
I was a Remainer in 2016, if anything I am on the moderate wing of the Tory membership now in terms of views of the EU.
BigG is also far closer to Starmer Labour or Davey's LDs than the current Tory leadership, just he has not admitted it to himself yet
That...has nothing to do with my question.
I actually do think you are closer to the Tory membership than BigG is, but what I asked was why you think that membership is a fan of Franco when you, on the moderate wing to hear yourself describe it, are not a fan.
I'm not having a dig at you, I just don't understand how you determined the party are more fans of Franco than the EU, when you say you are not a fan.
Interesting material from national archives about whether Gorbachev was offered assurances that NATO would not expand (from George Washington University):
Interesting material from national archives about whether Gorbachev was offered assurances that NATO would not expand (from George Washington University):
I normally finish up as 7, and I have failed - I think just once though.
Wordle I've never failed and have a suprising number of 2s - above my 3s.
What is your Quordle strategy? I get tempted to finish off words, since I've got to do them sooner or later, but feel I ought to be concentrating in the early lines on covering the alphabet, and then homing in. I usually get it, but often only ort 8 or 9.
I use a vowel heavy word to start, and with the most obvious consanants. I vary things though.
I don't chase the nearly complete. If there are two or three possibilties don't chase them. Maximum information at every step,
Read this interview with Karaganov (reliable bellwether of 🇷🇺ruling elite majority consensus).
If afterwards you still harbor any illusions about sustainable negotiated settlement with Putin's Kremlin on European security order read it again. And again.
As he says, war with West looks more inevitable as each day goes by.
Hope to God he is wrong.
Indeed. Anyone with eyes and honest evidence knows that war with the West is not just unwinnable for Russia, but could only end in rout for them, unless:
1. The Putinists are very confident that they can mobilize 5th columns to great effect, or they can bring in China on their side (no other ally would make a significant difference), OR 2. It goes nuclear.
Given the shocking state of most Russian military kit, how likely are the Russians not to have skimped on nuclear weapon maintenance?
I think you made a similar point before and it's a very fair one but not desperately comforting.
Say 90% of their warheads don't work - that still leaves a totally trashed world in the event of them being fired. Especially since the Western retaliation would presumably have to be based on assumption Russian nukes work.
And the Chinese retaliation if they cannot accurately tell where incoming missiles are aimed.
Unless Putin fires a nuclear missile at a NATO nation there will be no NATO nuclear weapons fired at Russia and even then only a NATO nuclear response is guaranteed if France, the USA or UK are hit.
China is on the other side of the world, even if closer to Russia now.
You keep writing this. Do you think that the more times you write that NATO will only retaliate a strike on a NATO member the truer it becomes.
Were Russia to strike Finland or Sweden, I have no doubt the narrative changes.
Even then NATO would not nuke Russia, at most it would be an airstrike and even then not guaranteed as neither are in NATO so it could just be even tighter sanctions on Russia
Well what is the point of the nuclear deterrent if Russia flattens Stockholm and Helsinki and NATO just shrugs it's shoulders and says "well it's not on our patch, carry on, as you were".
You know the answer to this. The nuclear deterrent is meant to protect those who possess it from nuclear attack. It deters nuclear attack upon those nations, as the would-be attacker knows that in return they will be nuked. Clearly it doesn't deter them from attacking a completely different country.
That's clearly false, and you demonstrably know nothing about this subject if you think that's true.
Do enlighten me. Or am I expected to take this pathetic riposte complete with split infinitive as the last word on the matter?
Well you can look into the concept of the nuclear umbrella for starters. This concept covers a range of formal and informal agreements to provide security against catastrophic attack by a mutual enemy.
Whilst you're at it, you might want to look up what a split infinitive is. Not that I mind doing it, it's perfectly fine to not avoid doing it, but I didn't in the above post.
There would seem to be little point in looking up a concept that isn't in any way applicable to what I wrote, which remains completely true. We have no agreements with any other countries to use our nuclear deterrent on their behalf, indeed such a notion would undermine the entire point of us having it.
ACCORDING TO AN EXIT POLL LEAK TO THE BELGIAN NEWSPAPER LIBRE (that always happens btw):
MACRON AND LE PEN ARE TIED AT 24%
(Melenchon at 19%)
That would be Melenchon and Macron pretty much identical to last time and Le Pen 2-3% better.
Hmm interesting, but I thought the 8pm projection will be based on a vote count sample, and the earliest polling station closes are 7pm French time? Even if they were 6pm, Libre couldn't be reporting any early vote counts, but might have done it's own exit polling?
Yes, it would be notable if there was a clearer gap this time, perhaps meaning the second round won't be exactly like last time, but I'm not sure what Macron could do to really screw up.
ACCORDING TO AN EXIT POLL LEAK TO THE BELGIAN NEWSPAPER LIBRE (that always happens btw):
MACRON AND LE PEN ARE TIED AT 24%
(Melenchon at 19%)
That would be Melenchon and Macron pretty much identical to last time and Le Pen 2-3% better.
Hmm interesting, but I thought the 8pm projection will be based on a vote count sample, and the earliest polling station closes are 7pm French time? Even if they were 6pm, Libre couldn't be reporting any early vote counts, but might have done it's own exit polling?
Yes, we get an official 8pm projection, based on actual early counts of ballots in swing areas. It’s normally frighteningly accurate.
Question: why do we have stag parties and hen parties? Stags and hens don’t mate. Surely it should be stag parties and doe parties. Or hen parties and…
I know a lady who had a 'Doe Do' which is a perfectly rational name, but she had to explain to everybody it was hen party with a better name, and like a joke if you have to explain it then its not funny.
Interesting material from national archives about whether Gorbachev was offered assurances that NATO would not expand (from George Washington University):
Whatever the truth of what he thought was offered or what was offered, it's certainly been part of Russian myth at this point treating it with the same authority and permanence as if carved in stone tablets at Mt Sinai, rather than, you know, political assurances and agreements which can alter.
Interesting material from national archives about whether Gorbachev was offered assurances that NATO would not expand (from George Washington University):
I agree "oops". I think it is also defensible that nothing "legal" was offered. It is worth a read of some of the docs.
I don't think it gives any excuse for Russian actions, or values.
I think what it does mean is that there has to be a very careful navigation out that needs to very seriously take the future of Russia for the next half-century into account. The last thing anyone needs is Russia as a failed state, and to pretend that Western Europe has clean hands.
This afternoon I've been reading a bit of history on the Algerian War of independence, and it is an eye opener. Next on the list is Mau-Mau.
FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: TURNOUT 65.0% AT 1700 CET (2017: 69.4%) #Presidentielle2022 #Election2022 #France
When does the poll close
7pm our time.
Awfully early finish. What time do they start?
Polls close before sunset. All those famished muslims...
I did wonder the other day, if Ramadan might play a part in turnout in certain areas? Did the fasting muslims turn up early, late, or not at all; or in large or small numbers compared to the last election?
I normally finish up as 7, and I have failed - I think just once though.
Wordle I've never failed and have a suprising number of 2s - above my 3s.
What is your Quordle strategy? I get tempted to finish off words, since I've got to do them sooner or later, but feel I ought to be concentrating in the early lines on covering the alphabet, and then homing in. I usually get it, but often only ort 8 or 9.
Three words covering 15 letters to start, eg Stern, Cough and Plaid. I get the four words in guesses 4-7 about 75% of the time after that. Almost always by guess 9. Of course with this strategy you will almost never get it in <7 guesses.
Assuming these are correct there are some significant vote % drops for Macron and although these DOM-TOM results are fairly low overall numbers (and there are often big swings in the overseas regions), the overseas results would back up the first round being a tie.
FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: TURNOUT 65.0% AT 1700 CET (2017: 69.4%) #Presidentielle2022 #Election2022 #France
When does the poll close
7pm our time.
Awfully early finish. What time do they start?
Polls close before sunset. All those famished muslims...
I did wonder the other day, if Ramadan might play a part in turnout in certain areas? Did the fasting muslims turn up early, late, or not at all; or in large or small numbers compared to the last election?
I can't see that Ramadan will make any difference. It is not Friday and not Eid so basically it is a normal day, sans manger. Voting ends at 8pm which is before sunset so that is not a factor either. (fpt)
If Le Pen does 'win' in the next few hours, then My plan is to wait 24 hours for the odds to shift then pile in on Macron,
Le Pen winning, would be the best possible incentive for broadly moderate but apathetic voters to get out and vote Macron in the second round and for people who voted for other candies to 'hold there nose' and also vote Macron in the second round.
Rather ridiculous given Tugendhat is a Remainer unlike Sunak and not even in the Cabinet.
Wallace should be in the top 3 to succeed Boris alongside Truss and Sunak, not Tugendhat
Is the Leaver/Remainer thing still a dynamic though? I get the impression that the Tories are now seeing Brexit as something of an embarrassment best forgotten about. (The last strained attempt to make a virtue out of it was the stuff with Rees-Mogg and The Sun but I doubt there'll be any repetition of that - just too silly.)
Of course it is, given the vast majority of Tory voters let alone Tory members are still strongly pro Brexit and the Brexit deal we have. That will continue to be the case for at least a generation
You live in a world of make believe
I am in favour of brexit but want a deal that draws the UK - EU closer together especially on trade
You are a Remain voter who voted for Blair and has never been a great fan of Boris.
That rather proves my point, you are hardly typical of most current Tory voters and Tory members
Mate, you are a fan of Franco. I think G is more in tune with Conservative voters than you are.
The average Tory member is probably more a fan of Franco than the EU now.
I never said I was a fan of his anyway, just he did keep Spain together
If you are not a fan, why are you so confident the average Tory is a fan?
I was a Remainer in 2016, if anything I am on the moderate wing of the Tory membership now in terms of views of the EU.
BigG is also far closer to Starmer Labour or Davey's LDs than the current Tory leadership, just he has not admitted it to himself yet
I voted remain also but the idea you are a moderate conservative is for the birds
At least HYUFD doesn't pretend unlike you. Why don't you leave him alone?
BigG strikes me as an exceptionally moderate and mild-mannered Conservative. In the same manner as (say) Southam for Labour. Both have their own angles and opinions on events, but neither have ever struck me as extreme.
CHB's point is G. ebs and flows between Johnson and Sunak, whereas HY has been full square behind Johnson come rain or shine.
FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: TURNOUT 65.0% AT 1700 CET (2017: 69.4%) #Presidentielle2022 #Election2022 #France
When does the poll close
7pm our time.
Awfully early finish. What time do they start?
Polls close before sunset. All those famished muslims...
I did wonder the other day, if Ramadan might play a part in turnout in certain areas? Did the fasting muslims turn up early, late, or not at all; or in large or small numbers compared to the last election?
I can't see that Ramadan will make any difference. It is not Friday and not Eid so basically it is a normal day, sans manger. Voting ends at 8pm which is before sunset so that is not a factor either. (fpt)
I was wondering if the afternoon sleepers couldn’t be bothered? IMHO turnout would be much higher if polls remained open past Iftar.
Assuming these are correct there are some significant vote % drops for Macron and although these DOM-TOM results are fairly low overall numbers (and there are often big swings in the overseas regions), the overseas results would back up the first round being a tie.
Le Pen 3.25 to win Rd 1 could be worth a punt.
Just looking at the first couple (though the magic of google translate), I wonder why Melenchon has surged in a few as he has (taking on board what you say about big swings and low overall numbers).
Lower turnout in general is bad for Le Pen and great for Macron: his voters are older and richer than Hers and thus tend to vote more. But turnout is not as bad as announced by some polls. The key will be differential turnout: Paris and suburban departments see to vote less which is bad for Macron and even more for Melenchon.
Leon - On your choice between Melenchon and Le Pen: I'd do what I did in the 2016 and 2020 American presidential elections: write in the name of a candidate I thought fit for the office. (Mitt Romney, for the curious.) That was easy for me each year, because I knew that the Democratic candidate would carry my home state of Washington.
Suppose I knew, magically, that my vote might make a difference, however improbable? Then I would have to research which candidate would do the least damage, allowing for the likely results of the legislative elections. (As of now, I haven't a clue.)
(I assume writing in a name would result in a spoiled ballot, rather than being counted, which is unfortunate. I rather like our write-in option, even though I have had to grit my teeth when I have used it.)
Assuming these are correct there are some significant vote % drops for Macron and although these DOM-TOM results are fairly low overall numbers (and there are often big swings in the overseas regions), the overseas results would back up the first round being a tie.
Le Pen 3.25 to win Rd 1 could be worth a punt.
Just looking at the first couple (though the magic of google translate), I wonder why Melenchon has surged in a few as he has (taking on board what you say about big swings and low overall numbers).
Simple- last time Macron received a lot of left-wing votes (Caribbean DOM are very left wing). This time he runs more as a centre to centre right candidates, leaving all the left wing vote to Melenchon.
Maybe it's just me, but I can't get excited about today's election. It looks certain that Macron and Le Pen will get through, and I don't think their actual % counts are particularly significant as indicators for the second round, unless one of them scores way off expectations.
The second round, however, is a different matter. In a fortnight's time it could be very tense and all-consuming, and if Le Pen looks like winning I'll be drinking very heavily (to drown my sorrows, not in celebration).
FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: TURNOUT 65.0% AT 1700 CET (2017: 69.4%) #Presidentielle2022 #Election2022 #France
When does the poll close
7pm our time.
Awfully early finish. What time do they start?
Polls close before sunset. All those famished muslims...
I did wonder the other day, if Ramadan might play a part in turnout in certain areas? Did the fasting muslims turn up early, late, or not at all; or in large or small numbers compared to the last election?
I can't see that Ramadan will make any difference. It is not Friday and not Eid so basically it is a normal day, sans manger. Voting ends at 8pm which is before sunset so that is not a factor either. (fpt)
I was wondering if the afternoon sleepers couldn’t be bothered? IMHO turnout would be much higher if polls remained open past Iftar.
Polls close before sunset which is why I do not think going home to eat (iftar) would be a factor. No-one would go out after, say, 10pm to vote even if the polls were kept open. I'd agree it would make a difference in the darker months.
Assuming these are correct there are some significant vote % drops for Macron and although these DOM-TOM results are fairly low overall numbers (and there are often big swings in the overseas regions), the overseas results would back up the first round being a tie.
Le Pen 3.25 to win Rd 1 could be worth a punt.
New Caledonia may be distinctive.
They have just had an independence process with 3 close Referenda, and some in the independence think the last should have been delayed until post-COVID. It was not.
In the 2018 referendum, 56.7% of voters chose to remain in France. In the 2020 referendum, this percentage dropped with 53.4% of voters choosing to remain part of France.[30]
The Nouméa Accord permits one further referendum to be held, should at least a third of members of the Congress of New Caledonia request it. The third referendum was held on 12 December 2021.[31] The referendum was boycotted by pro-independence forces who wanted a delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic and were angry at "stay" campaigning by the French government. This led to 96% of voters choosing to stay with France. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Caledonia
FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: TURNOUT 65.0% AT 1700 CET (2017: 69.4%) #Presidentielle2022 #Election2022 #France
When does the poll close
7pm our time.
Awfully early finish. What time do they start?
Polls close before sunset. All those famished muslims...
I did wonder the other day, if Ramadan might play a part in turnout in certain areas? Did the fasting muslims turn up early, late, or not at all; or in large or small numbers compared to the last election?
I can't see that Ramadan will make any difference. It is not Friday and not Eid so basically it is a normal day, sans manger. Voting ends at 8pm which is before sunset so that is not a factor either. (fpt)
I was wondering if the afternoon sleepers couldn’t be bothered? IMHO turnout would be much higher if polls remained open past Iftar.
Polls close before sunset which is why I do not think going home to eat (iftar) would be a factor. No-one would go out after, say, 10pm to vote even if the polls were kept open. I'd agree it would make a difference in the darker months.
No, I think that the polls closing before Iftar leads to a reduced turnout. People are sleeping in the afternoon, not voting.
If Le Pen does 'win' in the next few hours, then My plan is to wait 24 hours for the odds to shift then pile in on Macron,
Le Pen winning, would be the best possible incentive for broadly moderate but apathetic voters to get out and vote Macron in the second round and for people who voted for other candies to 'hold there nose' and also vote Macron in the second round.
Sigh.
I’ll be polite and gentle with you BigRich. But where is he getting those extra moderate votes from an electorate and votes cast in round one that is anti Macron? The problem with PB on this election for months now is it’s easily the electable face of moderate versus beyond the pale extremists, summed up beautifully today by HY equating Macron to Nick Clegg, not Rishi Sunak trying to impose Thatcherism without a hint of compromise.
From todays BBC
The old tribal tradition of voting either for the left or right has gone. One market trader in Paris said he was yet to decide whether to vote for Marine Le Pen, 53, or 70-year-old Jean-Luc Mélenchon.
After voting at a Paris polling station, Chloé told the BBC the candidates had spent too much time focusing on international affairs, but now was not the time: "They're not talking about the biggest subjects for us and our everyday lives." Malika said she was voting for Eric Zemmour on the far right because "I want to vote for France, not party politics".
For many voters, there is no longer a stigma about voting for the far right. Philippe Bridou, a former Socialist voter in south-western city of Perpignan, told the BBC he had switched to the far right because "security is important, immigration is important too because it's a subject now - and the left wing doesn't discuss it".
Gideon Rachman @gideonrachman The fact that Marine Le Pen has a diploma in cat breeding is meant to make her more cuddly. But I find it faintly sinister that she says that one of the attractions is studying their “genetic characteristics” to allow for “the perfection of the race” (as quoted in Le Monde).
Assuming these are correct there are some significant vote % drops for Macron and although these DOM-TOM results are fairly low overall numbers (and there are often big swings in the overseas regions), the overseas results would back up the first round being a tie.
Le Pen 3.25 to win Rd 1 could be worth a punt.
They also have a preliminary exit poll showing Le Pen and Macron neck and neck at 24%.
Comments
If Le Pen comes first tonight, take the opportunity to pile on Macron to win the presidency as his price goes out.
"Friends of Mr Sunak say he considered resigning over the row last week.
One said: 'He feels very bad for the way that Akshata has been impacted because of his career.
'In the end they decided to do the U-turn, but it was a close-run thing, and if this carries on he might still decide that is it not worth the stress.'"
With friends like that who needs enemies? The narrative should be we have decided to put matters right in any event, not we only coughed up as the price of hanging in there as Chancellor. Absolutely terrible quote.
Realistically he has to go. He and Johnson have a joint interest in making it a soft landing, him to protect his CV and Johnson so this doesn't look like sleaze and incompetence.
South Wales has long felt threatened, and allegedly guests at Big G castle have been served leek soup with a clear Northern buttery taste.
As I understand it he's prepared to snub a nose, maybe two, to seize the lands under the G mark.
Man City
Man United
Everton
I’ve not really followed much of the football this season, but I think tonight’s result probably decides the league. Just paid up the PPV to watch the match.
It's almost as if those compiling the odds have never spoken to a Tory MP....
Daily Quordle 76
6️⃣2️⃣
3️⃣5️⃣
quordle.com
⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ 🟩⬜🟩⬜⬜
⬜🟩⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜🟨🟩⬜⬜
⬜⬜⬜🟩🟩 ⬜⬜🟩🟨⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Here's a thought: what if no Ukraine and a Sunak driven vonc? Would Johnson have detonated this bomb to collapse the vonc and buy a year's safety?
Number until complete Russian control after 46 days of war = 0
Remember 2 of the Oblasts had been partially invaded in 2014. Crimea is an autonomous republic.
Paris's notable underperformance continues, with a 17h turnout of 52.2%, twelve points on the 64.5% of 2017.…
But again, beyond Paris, it doesn't seem Macron areas are uniformly underperforming or that Le Pen areas are uniformly overperforming..
https://twitter.com/leonardocarella/status/1513174933572100103
Wordle I've never failed and have a suprising number of 2s - above my 3s.
Both Macron and Le Pen have some good and poor turnout figures in their strongholds .
In the UK, there's some evidence for a (possibly temporary) depopulation of London due to the plague.
Anyone know if something similar has happened in Paris, and could that explain the apparent lower turnout?
It is worth considering why some predictions of the usefulness of such weapons were wrong.
When handheld anti-tank weapons were invented, it seemed that the age of the tank was over. One man, with such a weapon could reliably push an hole through a thickness of armour plate that barely the largest battleship could carry.
Yet the panzerfaust didn't stop the T-34s and IS-2s of the Red Army. Hundreds were fired for each tank destroyed.
Again, when the anti-tank missile revolution came about in the 60's, the tank was doomed. Again. For a while it seemed it might be true - the Israeli's lost a lot of tanks in 1973 war.
When in more modern conflicts, US, UK and Israeli tanks were faced with the latest generation of tandem warhead systems, they did well - many, many rounds fired and few tanks destroyed.
The reasons? Partly that the US, UK and Israeli tanks had the very latest armour. Specifically designed to defeat the tandem warhead weapons. Also that their infantry worked with their armoured units in the manner that was first worked out in WWI - tanks need infantry to survive as infantry needs tanks to back them up.
What is happening in Ukraine? Why is it apparently different from recent Western experience?
- The weapons this time are empathising top attack, where the armour of all tanks is thinest. They do so automatically.
- The Ukranians are using buildings as well, apparently, to shoot downwards onto Russian armoured vehicles. The Chechens did this, during their war, incidentally and destroyed many Russian vehicles.
- Some of the weapons soft launch, making them easier to use inside buildings.
- The Russians, from videos *from their own side*, are not always using infantry to support tanks. They are driving into battles and the infantry gets out to fight after the battle has started. At least some of the time.
- A major difference between Western armoured vehicles and Russian designs is the density or the weapons inside and the protection for them. Western tanks and armoured vehicles spend size and weight on protecting the crew from the ammunition and fuel carried. The Russian doctrine emphasised small size and weight of the overall vehicle. So Russian tanks and personnel carriers explode and burn much more easily when hit and with worse consequences for the crews.
ACCORDING TO AN EXIT POLL LEAK TO THE BELGIAN NEWSPAPER LIBRE (that always happens btw):
MACRON AND LE PEN ARE TIED AT 24%
(Melenchon at 19%)
That would be Melenchon and Macron pretty much identical to last time and Le Pen 2-3% better.
https://www.economist.com/interactive/france-2022
Reuters is sticking with 53/47.
https://graphics.reuters.com/FRANCE-ELECTION/POLLS/zjvqkomzlvx/
What is your Quordle strategy? I get tempted to finish off words, since I've got to do them sooner or later, but feel I ought to be concentrating in the early lines on covering the alphabet, and then homing in. I usually get it, but often only ort 8 or 9.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct41d0
Macron 8,656,346 votes
Le Pen 7,678,491
Fillon 7,212,995
Mélenchon 7,059,951
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_French_presidential_election#Results
https://www.resultats-elections.interieur.gouv.fr/presidentielle-2022/
Oh.
https://twitter.com/roddyqc/status/1513183897907048451
Anyway the point is moot because it happened here how it happened. But it amuses me to think of these things.
John Lichfield"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/08/french-politics-marine-le-pen-france-europe
I actually do think you are closer to the Tory membership than BigG is, but what I asked was why you think that membership is a fan of Franco when you, on the moderate wing to hear yourself describe it, are not a fan.
I'm not having a dig at you, I just don't understand how you determined the party are more fans of Franco than the EU, when you say you are not a fan.
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early
I don't chase the nearly complete. If there are two or three possibilties don't chase them. Maximum information at every step,
LuckyGuy's statement was really quite ignorant, and a little strange too.
* I think Remoaner is becoming the correct word - eg some of the replies under the tweet wrt the BJ visit to Kyiv on the Ukraine Embassy feed.
In the last 3 French presidential elections, the final turnout has been 8-10 points higher than the 5pm mark…
https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/1513169048397352961?cxt=HHwWgsC47e_O7f8pAAAA
I don't think it gives any excuse for Russian actions, or values.
I think what it does mean is that there has to be a very careful navigation out that needs to very seriously take the future of Russia for the next half-century into account. The last thing anyone needs is Russia as a failed state, and to pretend that Western Europe has clean hands.
This afternoon I've been reading a bit of history on the Algerian War of independence, and it is an eye opener. Next on the list is Mau-Mau.
Did the fasting muslims turn up early, late, or not at all; or in large or small numbers compared to the last election?
https://www.lalibre.be/international/europe/elections-france/2022/04/10/election-presidentielle-francaise-2022-voici-les-premiers-resultats-ZXAK2T6BM5EZVJWF7WJUOTOQWA/
2017 for comparison:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_French_presidential_election#By_department
Assuming these are correct there are some significant vote % drops for Macron and although these DOM-TOM results are fairly low overall numbers (and there are often big swings in the overseas regions), the overseas results would back up the first round being a tie.
Le Pen 3.25 to win Rd 1 could be worth a punt.
Le Pen winning, would be the best possible incentive for broadly moderate but apathetic voters to get out and vote Macron in the second round and for people who voted for other candies to 'hold there nose' and also vote Macron in the second round.
But turnout is not as bad as announced by some polls.
The key will be differential turnout: Paris and suburban departments see to vote less which is bad for Macron and even more for Melenchon.
Suppose I knew, magically, that my vote might make a difference, however improbable? Then I would have to research which candidate would do the least damage, allowing for the likely results of the legislative elections. (As of now, I haven't a clue.)
(I assume writing in a name would result in a spoiled ballot, rather than being counted, which is unfortunate. I rather like our write-in option, even though I have had to grit my teeth when I have used it.)
This time he runs more as a centre to centre right candidates, leaving all the left wing vote to Melenchon.
The second round, however, is a different matter. In a fortnight's time it could be very tense and all-consuming, and if Le Pen looks like winning I'll be drinking very heavily (to drown my sorrows, not in celebration).
But very fucking tedious that Paris flights are domestic, hence Orly not CdG
They have just had an independence process with 3 close Referenda, and some in the independence think the last should have been delayed until post-COVID. It was not.
In the 2018 referendum, 56.7% of voters chose to remain in France. In the 2020 referendum, this percentage dropped with 53.4% of voters choosing to remain part of France.[30]
The Nouméa Accord permits one further referendum to be held, should at least a third of members of the Congress of New Caledonia request it. The third referendum was held on 12 December 2021.[31] The referendum was boycotted by pro-independence forces who wanted a delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic and were angry at "stay" campaigning by the French government. This led to 96% of voters choosing to stay with France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Caledonia
Maybe some of them voted early this morning.
I’ll be polite and gentle with you BigRich. But where is he getting those extra moderate votes from an electorate and votes cast in round one that is anti Macron? The problem with PB on this election for months now is it’s easily the electable face of moderate versus beyond the pale extremists, summed up beautifully today by HY equating Macron to Nick Clegg, not Rishi Sunak trying to impose Thatcherism without a hint of compromise.
From todays BBC
The old tribal tradition of voting either for the left or right has gone. One market trader in Paris said he was yet to decide whether to vote for Marine Le Pen, 53, or 70-year-old Jean-Luc Mélenchon.
After voting at a Paris polling station, Chloé told the BBC the candidates had spent too much time focusing on international affairs, but now was not the time: "They're not talking about the biggest subjects for us and our everyday lives."
Malika said she was voting for Eric Zemmour on the far right because "I want to vote for France, not party politics".
For many voters, there is no longer a stigma about voting for the far right.
Philippe Bridou, a former Socialist voter in south-western city of Perpignan, told the BBC he had switched to the far right because "security is important, immigration is important too because it's a subject now - and the left wing doesn't discuss it".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61049717
@gideonrachman
The fact that Marine Le Pen has a diploma in cat breeding is meant to make her more cuddly. But I find it faintly sinister that she says that one of the attractions is studying their “genetic characteristics” to allow for “the perfection of the race” (as quoted in Le Monde).
https://twitter.com/gideonrachman/status/1513074303822024704
@KyivIndependent
·
2h
⚡️ Putin, Lukashenko to meet in Russian Far East on April 12.
The two dictators will discuss the war in Ukraine at Vostochny Cosmodrome in the Russian Far East.
Russian state-controlled media reported that there will be a press conference after the meeting.
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1513160129272762377
===
Why do they need to meet in the far east?