Howdy, Stranger!

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

A Tribute Act – politicalbetting.com

1246714

Comments

  • ping said:

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Oh dear. How sad. Nevermind. 😉
  • Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,938
    I think the expression is

    BOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,944
    edited October 2
    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Cyclefree said:

    On a positive note, the thread header appears to be spelled correctly.

    On a less positive side, I would like Cyclefree to stretch herself next time, and not do a 'things are terrible and awful and shit, and everyone is stupid, and here's 7 bullet points about why and how.' thread header. A lot of people seem to use PB as therapy to cleanse them of their rage and negativity, but usually it's below the line. Maybe actually propose something positive that might make things better in a small way?

    Regarding economical growth, the header is wrong - going for growth was exactly what Sunak wasn't going to do; in common with the general Davos consensus, his prospectus was a swerve into austerity that held every prospect of not only bringing a recession, but a depression. We're lucky we've dodged that bullet. Growth itself is a rebellious choice these days, and God speed Truss for making it her choice.

    Here you are - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/05/01/thinking-the-unthinkable-hows-this-going-to-be-paid-for/

    Some proposals from May 2020 on how to pay for the spending we had of necessity incurred by then.

    I wonder what your responses were then to those proposals and what constructive proposals you made then or since.

    In fact since you seem to think that Truss's proposals are great please explain how they will work.

    I am quite worried because I think the position for pension funds, their companies and banks is probably more serious and likely to last longer than a few days. Understandably the authorities are not letting on. This is based on my experience - pretty close tho the heart of the action - back in 2008. And I have little confidence in the government having a clue as to what to do or even appreciating that there is a problem.

    I have something to say. It comes from a particular perspective, which may be of interest to some. It is certainly not a complete or the only perspective on what is happening. It is I would venture to suggest a touch more valuable than your Panglossian approach.

    I do find the spectacle of politics at the moment immensely funny - in a black humour sort of way. That is until I remember that it is damaging the prospects and hopes of my children. And that makes me angry. It is not therapy I want. But revenge on those who are damaging their future.
    I had not read the thread header that you reference, and although I don't agree with everything you say there, I did relish reading that a lot more, as I do with anything that flips from complaint into desire for improvement. I'm sorry that I was strongly critical - that's my fault for giving vent to my own frustrations. But I do believe that with your writing and analytical skills, you are capable of better. We shouldn't stay in anger and revenge for long. They're real emotions but they disconnect us from any real power to make things better.
    Writing and analytical skills: could you illustrate with quotations? I am seeing 95% banality and 5% misogyny.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    Leon said:

    Brevity, @Cyclefree, brevity

    I disagree.

    The in-depth analysis is one of the things that sets this place apart. The tldr; idiots can go elsewhere.
    There is a time and place for indepth analysis. When she's on form @Cyclefree does it really well (and, as I am well aware, for free)

    Not this time tho. This is an awful lots of words to say Truss is, so far, a 2nd rate Thatch. We can all see that
    It's not just that she's a 2nd rate Thatch. It's that the party seems to think that only a copy of a previous leader will do. See Boris doing his Churchill tribute act.

    Why can't they be themselves - a leader for the country now? Learn lessons from others: yes. But understand today's world and problems and come up with ideas for today.

    Nostalgia: it's the British disease and it infects our politics.

    (And also thank you for the compliment and the advice. Genuinely.)
    See, that's an interesting and worthwhile thesis you have there. Yet I didn't get that from the header as my eyes glazed over at all the paragraphs and "bullet points" especially when there is much to distract, of a turbulent Sunday evening

    Sometimes the more you say, the less you relay

    You could have made this valid argument with 400 words, not 2000



    Modern politics is a three way battle between future-looking progressives (Blair, Starmer, Brown), steady as we go conservatives (Cameron, May, Hague)and romantic backward looking nostalgists (Farage, Truss, Johnson, Corbyn).

    That is just laughably wrong
    Nah. It’s right.

    The biggest driving force in recent years has been the nostalgists of the left and right, all trying to turn the clock back to their preferred utopian view of the past. They have largely been in battle with the conservatives. We are only just beginning to see some new ideas creep in again as progressive forces gain strength..
    I agree that both left and right have been obsessed with nostalgia for a romanticised past, but I don't think that the centre-left has a coherent narrative. Truss is barking but does have a vision, albeit one of a crazy oligarchy in charge of impoverished serfs.
    I don't think Truss really does have that much of a vision. I think she has a very clear-headed view of reality, that reality being that Britain has been sleep-walking to penury for the last 30 years. Reports of her 'difficult' conversations about trade with her American counterpart when she was Foreign Sec, her cringey speeches about cheese and pork markets, even reports of her having a conversation about productivity with our Barty, are all simple indicators that she's frustrated with a UK that doesn’t work - doesn't know how to earn the first world services to which it aspires.

    That's all true as far as I'm concerned. It's nothing that plenty of PBers from all sides of the political spectrum haven't said before.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,035
    Scott_xP said:

    Our story tonight - At least 14 MPs have publicly criticised the economic path of Liz Truss and warnings of losing the whip are fuelling discontent. It’s not just 45p causing disquiet, there are big concerns about spending cuts too. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/02/tory-mps-hit-back-after-threats-issued-to-those-opposing-45p-tax-rate-abolition?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Great, are they against the NI cuts?
  • PeterMPeterM Posts: 302
    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Well with the energy bailout most peoples living standards arent been adversely affected yet
    So what does putin do
    If he is losing or seen to lose he will be out of power or possibly dead
    So in a losing situation what does he do
    He needs a gamechanger a tactical nuke or chemical weapons
    Obviously this risks massive western retaliation but he may calculate if the west fears a strategic nuclear response they may go easy
    A difficult one
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,775

    Leon said:

    Democracy is to the British what Food is to the French or Opera to the Italians

    We don't actually do it that well anymore, and we haven't innovated for 50 years, and often others do it better: yet we pride ourselves in it, because we believe it is ours. And we will fight for that, even if it makes us poorer

    Hence, Brexit

    This is a fun game.

    How about: France - cuisine; Italy - opera; Britain - team sports?

    Or: France - fashion; Italy - art; Britain - er, mountaineering?

    Or: Germany - classical music; Greece - civilisation; Britain - queues?
    If you speak Italian to your sweetheart, French to your mistress, English to your servant and German to your dog, to whom do you speak Russian?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 30,018
    AlistairM said:

    Foxy said:

    PeterM said:

    Yokes said:

    Yokes said:

    Leon said:

    Looks like Russian lines to the north east of Kherson may be collapsing

    https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1576602192990961664

    Oh dear. How sad. Nevermind.
    We could be close to the outright defeat of Russia in Ukraine. They are now rapidly retreating in the east and the south

    Which means we are potentially close to the point where Putin goes totally postal. Or not

    As they say: Brace

    Yokes said:

    Ukraine

    There are unconfirmed reports of a collapse of Russian lines to the North East of Kherson as a Ukrainian offensive pushes down the west bank of the Dneiper river. If so its currently a tenuous position for the Ukrainians as they appear to be most rapidly moving down the right flank of a concentration of Russian troops, ahead of the advancement further west. The bad news for the Russians is that it threatens yet another danger, if not quite of encirclement right now, of a hammer and anvil situation.

    On Lyman, no one knows how many Russians got trapped, how many escaped and how many died trying to get out but there is visual evidence suggesting hundreds got killed trying to escape.

    Ukraine seem to be making gains inland of the initial gains on the riverbank.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1576636571658649605

    Khreshchenivka🇺🇦

    https://maps.app.goo.gl/1m54VQWaH9r4xHhE8

    On Lyman, Ukraine claimed 500 Russian casualties two days in a row. Given some reports I thought the figure reported today could have been 1,000.
    The strories from Lyman are that it was in infamous turkey shoot territory.

    The North east advance is, if reports are true, looking a bit lopsided. That could just be reporting catching up, but its imperative that Ukrainian forces can avoid the Russians turning to face right to isolate that lopsidedness. Thats possible since the latter appears to be in reverse right now, but its not a banker.

    Two notes: 1. The Russan Airforce continues to not perform. 2. Russian artillery appears to have lost its edge, possibly because lots of it has been destroyed, possibly because their logistics chain has been really rumbled by depth strikes. Many weeks ago I ventured that this was an interesting comparison between the Russians who were very much direct fire on front line and the Ukrainians who were going for indirect and destruction behind the front.

    So far one winner.

    The most concerning thing though, if you are on the Russian side, is precisely no sizeable counter offensive anywhere, either directly to counter the recent advance or to divert/exploit a thin Ukrainian line somewhere. Its a really bad sign if they cant get something together.
    The Russians have continued to waste men and resources on fruitless attacks towards Bakhmut, rather than divert those forces to attempt a counteroffensive against recent Ukrainian advances. (Edit: This indicates a strategic failure at the top.)

    That said there is evidence in recent weeks of some Ukrainian advances defeated at some cost, towards Davydiv Brid and Pisky, so there are still Russian soldiers able and willing to fight and inflict losses on Ukraine.
    Its war, the Ukrainians will lose locally but right now they are winning strategically. Russia appears to have lost the ability right now to conduct large scale and wide offensives which seems absolutely nuts but there it is. Some of that is the sheer damage done to their first line manpower and kit, some if its poor troops, some of it is that the Ukrainians have much superior battlespace management which is one of the hidden stories of this war. I cant see that Russian inability lasting forever but the short term window to put the brakes on Ukraine is closing.

    The reality is that Ukrainian successes are serious and substantial but i have cautioned before against assuming its all over, its not. Until the Ukrainians can roll the Russians out, with the exception of Crimea, (which even the Ukrainians admit may be a sepcial case) its not over.

    Also the time for big offensives may be coming to an end as we enter mud season. So a stalemate may develop
    A big problem for the Russian logistics when there trucks can only do the paved roads.

    I think though that the mud season is more of an issue in the Donbas compared to the drier, Sandler Kherson soils.

    The Ukrainians have modern military trucks, it seems. With good capacity for what the US military used to call “flotation”.

    The Russians seem to be running out of shit truck with crappy tires….
    I think the Russians will have more to fear from when the muddy season switches to the frozen season. How many of their troops are equipped with winter gear? From videos I saw from the Kharkiv front they were sleeping under plastic sheets hung from trees.
    I’ve commented before that pro Russian media I’ve seen, via Russian relatives, show Russian soldiers living like tramps. Literally - cardboard nests etc.

    Either the Ukrainians have an incredibly tight media operation, or they are simply better at the basics of feeding and clothing their soldiers. And the Finns have just announced they are sending 100ks of sets of winter clothing to Ukraine….
  • Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    I was talking to my flat mate about electoral history and I said I'd ask here. No need to be a twat mate.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,635
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,113
    geoffw said:

    If you speak Italian to your sweetheart, French to your mistress, English to your servant and German to your dog, to whom do you speak Russian?

    Your enemies...
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 31,938
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    It's all motherhood and apple pie. Who, right or left wing, would disagree with that?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Scott_xP said:

    ANALYSIS: Tory conf is shrouded in gloom - has Truss already sealed her own fate? Former cab mins publicly saying PM must change course & 2 senior MPs tell me colleagues already coming up w suggestions to change party rules to oust PM & replace her quickly https://news.sky.com/story/tory-conference-is-shrouded-in-gloom-has-liz-truss-already-sealed-her-own-fate-12710506

    They could have all read PB throughout the summer and known full well what was coming.

  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145
    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    No announcements in the relevant place on gov.uk since August, so I'm assuming that drought conditions continue in all those areas where they were previously declared. We certainly need a wetter than average winter to avoid more problems next year.

    It would just cap everything if this wretched Government managed to stagger through to next year, and then had to order half the population (probably disproportionately concentrated in its own heartland areas) to queue for water at standpipes.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,035
    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    It's lovely, but it adds up to a deep cut in material living standards. Things like personal electronics and overseas holidays would have to go back to 60s levels to pay for the saving, the penalties on regions with lots of workers, the never-ending growth in spend on lifelong wardship for the most vulnerable social cases, etc etc.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,508

    seções apuradas: 457 de 472075

    Lula 51.15%

    Bolsonaro 36.77%

    After 6 mins of counting - think that is the quickest results I have seen anywhere ever.

    Almost as if It’s electronic.
    It is! :smiley:

    https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleicoes/2022/apuracao/president

    0.54% counted, Bolsonaro leads 48-41

    Betfair Lula 1.51 Bolsonaro 2.94
    The electricity in Bolsonaros’ votes moves more quickly than Lula’s?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
    He is literally saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE

    Only a fucking dimwit spit-roasted by stupidity would think this is incisive, or enlightening, or impressive journalism

    Actual cretins enjoy this shit, they are welcome to it
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 31,938
    PeterM said:

    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Well with the energy bailout most peoples living standards arent been adversely affected yet
    So what does putin do
    If he is losing or seen to lose he will be out of power or possibly dead
    So in a losing situation what does he do
    He needs a gamechanger a tactical nuke or chemical weapons
    Obviously this risks massive western retaliation but he may calculate if the west fears a strategic nuclear response they may go easy
    A difficult one
    The use of a tactical nuclear weapon is not actually going to alter very much on the battlefield.

    Yes, he could do something like nuke Kyiv, but he must know that his armed forces would be completely obliterated if he did that.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,938

    seções apuradas: 457 de 472075

    Lula 51.15%

    Bolsonaro 36.77%

    After 6 mins of counting - think that is the quickest results I have seen anywhere ever.

    Almost as if It’s electronic.
    It is! :smiley:

    https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleicoes/2022/apuracao/president

    0.54% counted, Bolsonaro leads 48-41

    Betfair Lula 1.51 Bolsonaro 2.94
    The electricity in Bolsonaros’ votes moves more quickly than Lula’s?
    No, just the $$$s to the IT guys.....
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 31,938
    geoffw said:

    Leon said:

    Democracy is to the British what Food is to the French or Opera to the Italians

    We don't actually do it that well anymore, and we haven't innovated for 50 years, and often others do it better: yet we pride ourselves in it, because we believe it is ours. And we will fight for that, even if it makes us poorer

    Hence, Brexit

    This is a fun game.

    How about: France - cuisine; Italy - opera; Britain - team sports?

    Or: France - fashion; Italy - art; Britain - er, mountaineering?

    Or: Germany - classical music; Greece - civilisation; Britain - queues?
    If you speak Italian to your sweetheart, French to your mistress, English to your servant and German to your dog, to whom do you speak Russian?
    Was that Charles V?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Jay in Kyiv
    @JayinKyiv
    Russian Parliament member just can't understand what happened to 1.5 million winter military uniforms.

    https://twitter.com/JayinKyiv/status/1576586342989205509
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,742
    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    There's no drought any more in Philadelphia, I can assure you! The remnants of my namesake are delivering days of rain

  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    My local reservoir is looking rather pathetic and remains at its lowest level for years.

    Still very much in drought, here.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,113
    EXCLUSIVE:

    Grant Shapps urges Liz Truss to abandon plans to scrap 45p rate, warning it is ‘politically tin- eared’ and will damage Tory economic credibility

    He says Govt should not be cutting taxes for rich. ‘When pain is around, pain must be shared’

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/8fd9a42a-421e-11ed-abc9-d0d53e948d21?shareToken=841da915d2ac7c1f6799d5b703af6a73
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72
  • eekeek Posts: 21,770

    I think the expression is

    BOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
    If he had done that in July we wouldn't be in this mess..
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    Ha off topic. I admit I rarely post ON topic. The point is about hubris and that does matter in BETTING context. You seem to be assuming these leads are real, and will follow through. They may, but there will be a lot of people out there, whipped up by the incessant media, and then polled in anger, who will creep into the polling booth and vote Tory, after saying they wouldn’t.
    I want this government gone. I want Starmer to have a chance as PM. But getting a hard on about polling leads in conference season, two years out is very dull indeed.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,113
    IanB2 said:

    There's no drought any more in Philadelphia, I can assure you! The remnants of my namesake are delivering days of rain

    Made for an exciting game
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,551
    edited October 2
    Apparently some polling stations in Brazil are still open due to queues .

    The early results are likely to show a skewed picture as most of that is from more rural areas which tend to favour Bolsonaro.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    I was talking to my flat mate about electoral history and I said I'd ask here. No need to be a twat mate.
    Fair enough. Your recent posts suggest otherwise.
  • PeterMPeterM Posts: 302
    Unhinged calls in red square for a holy war against the west

    https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1576126809993011205?s=20&t=RDtymYG8NEJz0ZNBhh8Tag
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,944

    Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    There haven't been any since 1945.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    It's all motherhood and apple pie. Who, right or left wing, would disagree with that?
    Well, as it calls for planning reform, then I would say the answer is large swathes of the tory membership and many of their voters.
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    Lula 4/6
    Bols 6/4
  • YokesYokes Posts: 987
    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Just a minor correction: The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples (except for the German political establishment) are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,210
    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    It absolutely is not.

    We keep our boat in Worcester. Every morning I check the level on the River Severn.

    It has been consistently low since late spring. Right now I could take the boat up to the Camp House without any more throttle than I’d need to pootle along the current-less canal. That is not normal for the start of October. I would think we had got away lightly if it were late August and the river level had stayed this low.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 30,018

    Jay in Kyiv
    @JayinKyiv
    Russian Parliament member just can't understand what happened to 1.5 million winter military uniforms.

    https://twitter.com/JayinKyiv/status/1576586342989205509

    They should ask…. a friend

    {relaxes into a pile of winter uniforms, one careful owner etc…}
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,113
    ...
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,508
    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721
    ping said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    My local reservoir is looking rather pathetic and remains at its lowest level for years.

    Still very much in drought, here.
    Things have recovered a bit in the South East but remain pretty droughty elsewhere:

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1108132/Rainfall_and_river_flow_summary_21_to_27_Sept_2022.pdf
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454
    ping said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    My local reservoir is looking rather pathetic and remains at its lowest level for years.

    Still very much in drought, here.
    It’s not unusual for reservoirs to be low this time year. November through Feb is when we get the bulk of our rain. February fill dyke and all that. People of course have a tendency to think that the drought stops as soon as the first rain falls.
  • Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    I was talking to my flat mate about electoral history and I said I'd ask here. No need to be a twat mate.
    Fair enough. Your recent posts suggest otherwise.
    So you’re calling me a liar? Well fuck off then you twat
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,508

    seções apuradas: 457 de 472075

    Lula 51.15%

    Bolsonaro 36.77%

    After 6 mins of counting - think that is the quickest results I have seen anywhere ever.

    Almost as if It’s electronic.
    It is! :smiley:

    https://g1.globo.com/politica/eleicoes/2022/apuracao/president

    0.54% counted, Bolsonaro leads 48-41

    Betfair Lula 1.51 Bolsonaro 2.94
    The electricity in Bolsonaros’ votes moves more quickly than Lula’s?
    No, just the $$$s to the IT guys.....
    😮 . .
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,695
    ping said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    My local reservoir is looking rather pathetic and remains at its lowest level for years.

    Still very much in drought, here.
    Rich bastard having your own reservoir :)
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    edited October 2

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    We’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
  • timpletimple Posts: 96
    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    It's all motherhood and apple pie. Who, right or left wing, would disagree with that?
    "There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    The Tories disagree with that. (at least in actions if not in words)
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,551

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    Only 1.5% of the votes have been counted . The early results aren’t a good guide as they’re mostly rural .
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,284
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
    He is literally saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE

    Only a fucking dimwit spit-roasted by stupidity would think this is incisive, or enlightening, or impressive journalism

    Actual cretins enjoy this shit, they are welcome to it
    I haven’t checked but I’d be amazed if he was ‘literally’ saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    PeterM said:
    This is a deeply malevolent regime probably in its death throes. Listen to the lack of enthusiasm

    Young Russians LIKE the West. They like the consumer goods, the internet, the media, the holidays in Spain, Italy, Turkey, the Maldives, and the elite like the flats in London, the villas in Provence, the jobs in California

    I have never met a Russian, rich or poor, who has ever expressed a desire for "Holy War" against the West. It is insane. Most of them personally *feel* Western , as compared to being Muslim or Chinese

    Putin is trying to sell a pup, before he dies. It's now a question of how much damage he does as he goes down
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,635
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
    He is literally saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE

    Only a fucking dimwit spit-roasted by stupidity would think this is incisive, or enlightening, or impressive journalism

    Actual cretins enjoy this shit, they are welcome to it
    Fortunately we have a PM who has a 'growth plan'. She's not sharing it just yet but I sleep easier knowing she has a plan.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,288
    Sean_F said:

    PeterM said:

    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Well with the energy bailout most peoples living standards arent been adversely affected yet
    So what does putin do
    If he is losing or seen to lose he will be out of power or possibly dead
    So in a losing situation what does he do
    He needs a gamechanger a tactical nuke or chemical weapons
    Obviously this risks massive western retaliation but he may calculate if the west fears a strategic nuclear response they may go easy
    A difficult one
    The use of a tactical nuclear weapon is not actually going to alter very much on the battlefield.

    Yes, he could do something like nuke Kyiv, but he must know that his armed forces would be completely obliterated if he did that.
    The use of a single tactical nuclear weapon on the battlefield will cause mass hysteria in the west, a financial crisis as the markets plummet (several banks and pension funds already supposedly over-leveraged and close to collapse), and could even cause paralysis at the heart of government if contingency plans aren't up to date, or western allies disagree on how to respond.

    Even the tiniest nuke will have far more wide ranging damage than just the blast radius.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    I was talking to my flat mate about electoral history and I said I'd ask here. No need to be a twat mate.
    Fair enough. Your recent posts suggest otherwise.
    So you’re calling me a liar? Well fuck off then you twat
    Calm down. You post endlessly about 20% leads etc, and then go on and on about hot great Starmer is. Fine. That’s not having a conversation. I’m not calling you a liar. I accept what you said is what happened. Why do you do this? You don’t need to pick fights on obscure blogs. I hope things are ok with you right now, genuinely.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 1,519
    PeterM said:
    Why do all these nutcases have outfits that look like what a Nazi would wear? I suppose if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck...
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,721
    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,508
    nico679 said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    Only 1.5% of the votes have been counted . The early results aren’t a good guide as they’re mostly rural .
    If tte betting understands this, why was it tightening? 🫣
  • TresTres Posts: 1,347
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
    He is literally saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE

    Only a fucking dimwit spit-roasted by stupidity would think this is incisive, or enlightening, or impressive journalism

    Actual cretins enjoy this shit, they are welcome to it
    Don't give Truss any ideas, she'll be after gravity next.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    "It's your fault."
    "No fucking way, it is your fault,"
    "Bollocks it is,"


  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145
    PeterM said:

    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Well with the energy bailout most peoples living standards arent been adversely affected yet
    So what does putin do
    If he is losing or seen to lose he will be out of power or possibly dead
    So in a losing situation what does he do
    He needs a gamechanger a tactical nuke or chemical weapons
    Obviously this risks massive western retaliation but he may calculate if the west fears a strategic nuclear response they may go easy
    A difficult one
    He could use tactical nukes in Ukraine, which won't give him a winning advantage and will simultaneously make it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, for his remaining friends abroad to remain on constructive terms with him. Alternatively, he could blame internal enemies for Russia's failures and initiate a reign of terror at home, which nobody outside of Russia will really care about, let alone have either the will or the means to stop.

    Both options lead to the frustration of his imperial ambitions, but the latter is much more likely to result in his personal survival and that of his wider regime. Let the purge begin.
  • Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    I was talking to my flat mate about electoral history and I said I'd ask here. No need to be a twat mate.
    Fair enough. Your recent posts suggest otherwise.
    So you’re calling me a liar? Well fuck off then you twat
    Calm down. You post endlessly about 20% leads etc, and then go on and on about hot great Starmer is. Fine. That’s not having a conversation. I’m not calling you a liar. I accept what you said is what happened. Why do you do this? You don’t need to pick fights on obscure blogs. I hope things are ok with you right now, genuinely.
    I asked a legitimate question and you just threw it back in my face. Just fuck off, ok?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,944
    AlistairM said:

    PeterM said:
    Why do all these nutcases have outfits that look like what a Nazi would wear? I suppose if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck...
    He looks like one of the Nazi characters out of Indiana Jones.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,551

    nico679 said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    Only 1.5% of the votes have been counted . The early results aren’t a good guide as they’re mostly rural .
    If tte betting understands this, why was it tightening? 🫣
    They clearly don’t . There are hardly any votes in from more urban areas and nothing at all from several Lula strongholds in the ne .
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    "It's your fault."
    "No fucking way, it is your fault,"
    "Bollocks it is,"


    Still been no explanation for KK at the funeral right? Is there a deep secret there that’s being protected?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Tres said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
    He is literally saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE

    Only a fucking dimwit spit-roasted by stupidity would think this is incisive, or enlightening, or impressive journalism

    Actual cretins enjoy this shit, they are welcome to it
    Don't give Truss any ideas, she'll be after gravity next.
    Apples on the floor?

    It.Is.A.Disgrace.
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    edited October 2
    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,565
    kyf_100 said:

    Sean_F said:

    PeterM said:

    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Well with the energy bailout most peoples living standards arent been adversely affected yet
    So what does putin do
    If he is losing or seen to lose he will be out of power or possibly dead
    So in a losing situation what does he do
    He needs a gamechanger a tactical nuke or chemical weapons
    Obviously this risks massive western retaliation but he may calculate if the west fears a strategic nuclear response they may go easy
    A difficult one
    The use of a tactical nuclear weapon is not actually going to alter very much on the battlefield.

    Yes, he could do something like nuke Kyiv, but he must know that his armed forces would be completely obliterated if he did that.
    The use of a single tactical nuclear weapon on the battlefield will cause mass hysteria in the west, a financial crisis as the markets plummet (several banks and pension funds already supposedly over-leveraged and close to collapse), and could even cause paralysis at the heart of government if contingency plans aren't up to date, or western allies disagree on how to respond.

    Even the tiniest nuke will have far more wide ranging damage than just the blast radius.
    Yes, that's my reading. Look how much chaos has been caused by one badly framed mini-budget in the UK

    A tactical nuke doesn't bear thinking about. There will be worldwide panic. Which is why I fear Putin will try it on, as he goes down to defeat, because in the anarchy he might end up a winner, rather than a definite loser

  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    Foxy said:

    1970 wasn't a landslide? Only 30 seat majority?

    Yes but a rarity where a party lost a working majority to another party with a working majority. That doesn't often happen here.
    I asked specifically about landslide to landslide.
    Are you aware of Wikipedia?
    Well I was trying to have a conversation, feel free to not take part.
    No, you are getting over excited again. Take a dried frog pill and chill out.
    I was talking to my flat mate about electoral history and I said I'd ask here. No need to be a twat mate.
    Fair enough. Your recent posts suggest otherwise.
    So you’re calling me a liar? Well fuck off then you twat
    Calm down. You post endlessly about 20% leads etc, and then go on and on about hot great Starmer is. Fine. That’s not having a conversation. I’m not calling you a liar. I accept what you said is what happened. Why do you do this? You don’t need to pick fights on obscure blogs. I hope things are ok with you right now, genuinely.
    I asked a legitimate question and you just threw it back in my face. Just fuck off, ok?
    And you don’t seem able to accept an apology. Sorry I did that. But please, calm down.
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    Lula 1.61
    Bols 2.6
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    edited October 2
    nico679 said:

    nico679 said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    Only 1.5% of the votes have been counted . The early results aren’t a good guide as they’re mostly rural .
    If tte betting understands this, why was it tightening? 🫣
    They clearly don’t . There are hardly any votes in from more urban areas and nothing at all from several Lula strongholds in the ne .
    what source are you getting this info from?

    Ta in advance.
  • ping said:

    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
    I have been comparing the results in so far of some states with 2018 totals. I think Lula is going to win the first round by about 10% on that basis.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493
    Yokes said:

    Sean_F said:

    kyf_100 said:

    pigeon said:

    Yokes said:

    Jonathan said:

    If Putin is close to defeat, is now the time to offer him something if we think he might go postal planet killer?

    Not sure what. I guess that’s the trouble.

    No, because the odds on him going nuclear are still fairly long. 1. People within his own coterie will seek to stop him and 2. I believe the US when they have said they will do a very large retaliation, which will, in effect end Russias ability to win this. And if they lose, Putin is likely done anyway.

    In short even if he did, if the West sticks to that stance, Putin is finished
    FWIW, a report in the Graun quotes General Petraeus (the ex-CIA director and senior American general) suggesting that NATO would respond to the use of tactical nuclear weapons by wiping out the Russian occupation forces in Ukraine and sinking the Black Sea fleet.

    Besides which, a resort to nuclear weapons is the one atrocity so grave that the United States could use it as a wedge to separate China and India from Putin. In particular, if I were in Biden's place I'd be having conversations with Xi in such circumstances along the lines of (a) trade with Russia or trade with us, you can't have both; and then, if that doesn't force him to drop Putin like a red hot stove, (b) you back this shit using nuclear weapons to wage a war of conquest, and we'll both recognise Taiwanese independence and extend our own nuclear umbrella over the island. You will never, ever get it back.

    Putin knows that there are a few lines he can't cross without triggering total economic isolation and the consequent collapse of the Russian economy, and so will all his cronies. If he wants to survive defeat then his best option isn't to resort to the indiscriminate use of WMDs, it's to draw up a long list of internal enemies on whom to blame the Russian army's failures and have them all arrested and tried for treason. Evidence of corruption on the part of almost every soldier above the rank of corporal shouldn't be hard to find for starters.
    The Russians using even a single battlefield nuke will trigger mass panic in the west. Shelves cleared of tinned food, fighting in the aisles over the last roll of andrex. The markets will shit themselves. Like what happened last week - cascading margin calls - only much, much worse, and it will be much harder (and costlier) for the government to step in to stabilise things.

    Meanwhile, a conventional reply by NATO forces - wiping out Russian positions in Ukraine, Black Sea Fleet, etc, could potentially lead to a deadly escalation. It could, for example, make ordinary Russian soldiers in the chain of command more likely to agree to an order from Putin to use strategic nukes, as they feel as if they are responding to NATO aggression. It could also lead to a deadly miscalculation - Russian radar sees a dozen conventional missiles approaching, mistakes them for a nuclear first strike, responds in kind.

    "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." That is the rational answer. The question is, is Putin rational? The other questions are: would his orders be followed, and what state is the Russian nuclear arsenal in? Questions I don't particularly want to find out the answers to. All I know is, this has the potential to escalate from here, very fast.
    The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.

    Putin is fucked, and there is nothing he can do about it now.
    Just a minor correction: The events of the past seven months have demonstrated that Western peoples (except for the German political establishment) are not pathetic cowards who will let the Russians roll over Ukraine for fear of their living standards being adversely affected.
    Just a major correction, it is neither pathetic, nor cowardice, to question the extent to which Britain should sacrifice the wellbeing of its own subjects in the cause of beating the Russians back from Kherson or Lyshansk. I suspect the same moralising arguments were used against contemporaries who questioned Richard the Lionheart emptying England's coffers to get the Saracens out of the Holy Land.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 19,944
    ping said:

    Lula 1.61
    Bols 2.6

    1.61 seems good if the polls are right.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,962
    Leon said:

    PeterM said:
    This is a deeply malevolent regime probably in its death throes. Listen to the lack of enthusiasm

    Young Russians LIKE the West. They like the consumer goods, the internet, the media, the holidays in Spain, Italy, Turkey, the Maldives, and the elite like the flats in London, the villas in Provence, the jobs in California

    I have never met a Russian, rich or poor, who has ever expressed a desire for "Holy War" against the West. It is insane. Most of them personally *feel* Western , as compared to being Muslim or Chinese

    Putin is trying to sell a pup, before he dies. It's now a question of how much damage he does as he goes down
    I suspect the elite quite like the West, too, in terms of it being where the nice food, clothes, cars and the other trappings of what some may call "the good life" originate.

    Putin too, I suspect, likes his nice clothes, his fine dining and all the trappings of capitalist wealth.

    He and his friends know with certainty all that ends with the first missile - that life style all ends, all gone. Even if they survive, it'll never be the same.

    I see you "enjoyed" Threads - oddly enough, a good argument for nuclear weapons. Seeing a valid depiction of the failure of deterrence convinced me of the need to maintain that deterrence. Is anything worth changing our admittedly imperfect world to that?
  • ping said:

    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
    I have been comparing the results in so far of some states with 2018 totals. I think Lula is going to win the first round by about 10% on that basis.
    resultsdos.tse.jus.br
    That is what gives a breakdown. Sorry I can't post a hyperlink
  • ping said:

    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
    I have been comparing the results in so far of some states with 2018 totals. I think Lula is going to win the first round by about 10% on that basis.
    resultsdos.tse.jus.br
    That is what gives a breakdown. Sorry I can't post a hyperlink
    Resultados.tsw.jus.br
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,472
    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    September was slightly above average for rainfall across England and Wales, which is a decent start, but not enough yet to declare that we are out of the woods.

    I know there's another government agency that publishes data on groundwater levels, but I can't remember where that is, or how often they update it. That would be the best data to look at if it's updated frequently enough.
  • ping said:

    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
    I have been comparing the results in so far of some states with 2018 totals. I think Lula is going to win the first round by about 10% on that basis.
    resultsdos.tse.jus.br
    That is what gives a breakdown. Sorry I can't post a hyperlink
    Resultados.tsw.jus.br
    Sorry editors it is tse not tsw
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    In all the stress and upset a nice gesture

    In the street where my son and his family live a large bucket of apples lies at a neighbours gate

    Anyone passing can help themselves to an apple or two, and the neighbour just keeps filling the bucket from her apple trees

    We really do need happy stories

    That’s good, and common round here too. I often think our ancestors would think us mad for the way we squander fruit from trees in our gardens and import it in planes from thousands of miles away.
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    edited October 2

    ping said:

    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
    I have been comparing the results in so far of some states with 2018 totals. I think Lula is going to win the first round by about 10% on that basis.
    resultsdos.tse.jus.br
    That is what gives a breakdown. Sorry I can't post a hyperlink
    Resultados.tsw.jus.br
    Sorry editors it is tse not tsw
    Nice one thanks
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 1,519

    In all the stress and upset a nice gesture

    In the street where my son and his family live a large bucket of apples lies at a neighbours gate

    Anyone passing can help themselves to an apple or two, and the neighbour just keeps filling the bucket from her apple trees

    We really do need happy stories

    We have such buckets all over our village at this time of year. We even have a community orchard which doesn't just provide free fruit at this time of year but also sometimes hosts small musical events.

    Also we regularly have people with plastic tubs outside their homes with any excess books, DVDs etc. for others to help themselves from.
  • pingping Posts: 3,177
    I’ve topped up more at 4/6.

    Now I really am all out.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,297
    edited October 2

    In all the stress and upset a nice gesture

    In the street where my son and his family live a large bucket of apples lies at a neighbours gate

    Anyone passing can help themselves to an apple or two, and the neighbour just keeps filling the bucket from her apple trees

    We really do need happy stories

    Someone believes in handouts.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 23,122

    Cyclefree said:

    On a positive note, the thread header appears to be spelled correctly.

    On a less positive side, I would like Cyclefree to stretch herself next time, and not do a 'things are terrible and awful and shit, and everyone is stupid, and here's 7 bullet points about why and how.' thread header. A lot of people seem to use PB as therapy to cleanse them of their rage and negativity, but usually it's below the line. Maybe actually propose something positive that might make things better in a small way?

    Regarding economical growth, the header is wrong - going for growth was exactly what Sunak wasn't going to do; in common with the general Davos consensus, his prospectus was a swerve into austerity that held every prospect of not only bringing a recession, but a depression. We're lucky we've dodged that bullet. Growth itself is a rebellious choice these days, and God speed Truss for making it her choice.

    Here you are - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/05/01/thinking-the-unthinkable-hows-this-going-to-be-paid-for/

    Some proposals from May 2020 on how to pay for the spending we had of necessity incurred by then.

    I wonder what your responses were then to those proposals and what constructive proposals you made then or since.

    In fact since you seem to think that Truss's proposals are great please explain how they will work.

    I am quite worried because I think the position for pension funds, their companies and banks is probably more serious and likely to last longer than a few days. Understandably the authorities are not letting on. This is based on my experience - pretty close tho the heart of the action - back in 2008. And I have little confidence in the government having a clue as to what to do or even appreciating that there is a problem.

    I have something to say. It comes from a particular perspective, which may be of interest to some. It is certainly not a complete or the only perspective on what is happening. It is I would venture to suggest a touch more valuable than your Panglossian approach.

    I do find the spectacle of politics at the moment immensely funny - in a black humour sort of way. That is until I remember that it is damaging the prospects and hopes of my children. And that makes me angry. It is not therapy I want. But revenge on those who are damaging their future.
    I had not read the thread header that you reference, and although I don't agree with everything you say there, I did relish reading that a lot more, as I do with anything that flips from complaint into desire for improvement. I'm sorry that I was strongly critical - that's my fault for giving vent to my own frustrations. But I do believe that with your writing and analytical skills, you are capable of better. We shouldn't stay in anger and revenge for long. They're real emotions but they disconnect us from any real power to make things better.
    I am not a politician. I can come up with lots of proposals on the law, police, financial regulation and investigation matters more generally because I have some knowledge. I have done so in some headers but that is now what this forum is primarily here to discuss.

    Despite a degree in economics I do not pretend to know the solutions to the economic issues facing the country and there are people on here who have much more practical knowledge of politics than I do, which is why it is pointless me writing such suggestions. @DavidL has come up with some interesting proposals, which I broadly agree with.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,635

    In all the stress and upset a nice gesture

    In the street where my son and his family live a large bucket of apples lies at a neighbours gate

    Anyone passing can help themselves to an apple or two, and the neighbour just keeps filling the bucket from her apple trees

    We really do need happy stories

    That’s good, and common round here too. I often think our ancestors would think us mad for the way we squander fruit from trees in our gardens and import it in planes from thousands of miles away.
    We have quite a few very productive apple trees - far too many for us. But so does just about everyone else in our village, so there's no point offering them to others.

    Years ago they would have been made into cider but I'm not a cider fan. Mostly, the birds have them tbh.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145
    Leon said:

    PeterM said:
    This is a deeply malevolent regime probably in its death throes. Listen to the lack of enthusiasm

    Young Russians LIKE the West. They like the consumer goods, the internet, the media, the holidays in Spain, Italy, Turkey, the Maldives, and the elite like the flats in London, the villas in Provence, the jobs in California

    I have never met a Russian, rich or poor, who has ever expressed a desire for "Holy War" against the West. It is insane. Most of them personally *feel* Western , as compared to being Muslim or Chinese
    OTOH there's precious little evidence of Russian opposition to the programme of imperial conquest and brutalisation in Ukraine. It's not just that most of the protest inside the country looks suspiciously like moaning about forced conscriptions rather than the actual morality of the exercise; it's that there is precious little dissent being voiced outside of the country, amongst people who are both entirely free to speak and too unimportant to be pursued by FSB hit squads with glow in the dark teabags. A couple of out-of-favour oligarchs and Pussy Riot does not a mass movement make.

    The Russian population, collectively, is either indifferent to the suffering its Government inflicts upon its neighbours or actively approves. The main objections to Putin's campaigns aren't the result of their perceived immorality, but of their incompetent execution and its consequences.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,113
    AlistairM said:

    We have such buckets all over our village at this time of year. We even have a community orchard which doesn't just provide free fruit at this time of year but also sometimes hosts small musical events.

    One of the local pubs has a fruit pressing weekend
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,660
    Lula is now 1.67, out from 1.4 this morning.

    Looking at the results so far and knowing fuck all about Brazilian politics that doesn't seem right?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,635

    ping said:

    TimS said:

    ping said:

    ping said:

    Lula 1.57
    Bols 2.72

    Is it beginning to look like the strangely confident Bolsonaro camp may have pulled off a shock win? 😕
    I think the polls are broadly right and the betting markets, wrong.

    But we’ll soon find out if in fact it is me that is the idiot. ;)
    Seems to be a similar dynamic to the US where the rural right wing votes come in first. Opposite to Britain.

    Of course that gives Bolsonaro the opportunity to create an arc of hope then betrayal, setting up his followers perfectly for a Jan 6th style coup attempt.
    Hmm. Not sure about that - they have electronic voting, so I’m not sure there’s much read across from our paper-vote elections.

    Are there any sites which show the geographical breakdown of results?
    I have been comparing the results in so far of some states with 2018 totals. I think Lula is going to win the first round by about 10% on that basis.
    resultsdos.tse.jus.br
    That is what gives a breakdown. Sorry I can't post a hyperlink
    Resultados.tsw.jus.br
    Sorry editors it is tse not tsw
    https://resultados.tse.jus.br/oficial/app/index.html#/eleicao/resultados
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,093
    Catching up on BBC News.

    Every time Truss speaks she loses another 1% on the poll i reckon.

    Utter disaster.

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,113
    On #BBCBreakfast on Monday we’ll speak to Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng at 7.30am.

    What would you ask him? https://twitter.com/BBCBreakfast/status/1576659075953491968/photo/1
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,448
    philiph said:

    ping said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This article is form 14th August:

    "Drought in England could carry on into new year, experts warn
    Without lots of heavy rain in autumn and winter, water restrictions could be tightened even further"

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/drought-in-england-could-carry-on-into-new-year-experts-warn

    Does anyone know whether the drought is over now?

    My local reservoir is looking rather pathetic and remains at its lowest level for years.

    Still very much in drought, here.
    Rich bastard having your own reservoir :)
    Dam. Wish I'd made that joke.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    In all the stress and upset a nice gesture

    In the street where my son and his family live a large bucket of apples lies at a neighbours gate

    Anyone passing can help themselves to an apple or two, and the neighbour just keeps filling the bucket from her apple trees

    We really do need happy stories

    That’s good, and common round here too. I often think our ancestors would think us mad for the way we squander fruit from trees in our gardens and import it in planes from thousands of miles away.
    We have quite a few very productive apple trees - far too many for us. But so does just about everyone else in our village, so there's no point offering them to others.

    Years ago they would have been made into cider but I'm not a cider fan. Mostly, the birds have them tbh.
    One of my colleagues has enough apples that he bought an apple press a few years ago and regularly makes cider. We have definitely become a lot more detached from the yearly cycle, and in some ways we are poorer for it. It’s great having all foods all year round, but there is also great joy in seasonal veg, such as the first asparagus shoots, or the first new potatoes.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,962
    Meanwhile, in Bulgaria, the party bloc led by former Prime Minister Stefan Yanev looks set to break into the National Assembly. The latest poll puts Bulgaria Rise at 4.9%.

    The latest seat prediction (240 seats in the National Assembly):

    GERB-SDS - 63 (+4)
    Change Continues (PP) - 53 (-14)
    Movement of Rights and Freedoms (DPS) - 41 (+7)
    Revival - 27 (+15)
    BSP - 24 (-2)
    Democratic Bulgaria - 19 (+3)
    Bulgaria Rise - 13 (+13)

    The ITN group will lose all 19 seats.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 10,454

    Catching up on BBC News.

    Every time Truss speaks she loses another 1% on the poll i reckon.

    Utter disaster.

    May she keep speaking daily. Another round of local radio should do wonders.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,493

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    ping said:

    https://www.ft.com/content/510948e9-3c33-42c5-929e-b97c953dc767

    Thanks to whoever linked to Martin Wolf’s FT piece^

    The 40 year chart of 10yr Uk govt bond yields is quite something to behold.

    Fucking scary, actually.

    Unless the new trend reverses, It’s going to have a profound impact on our politics.

    Whoever is in government is going to be constrained by balanced budgets.

    Juvenile and meaningless journalism





    "This is why systematic tax reform would be desirable. There must also be difficult deregulation, notably of land use. The state must supply first-class public goods, in the understanding that these are a social benefit, not a cost. There must be fiscal and monetary stability. There must be far higher investment in physical and human capital, both public and private. There must be higher savings. There must be a pro-growth regional policy. There must be an internationally open economy. There must, not least, be stable and credible policies, not the constant risk of another trade war with our closest neighbours."

    It is no better than Putin's generalship

    THERE MUST BE ADVANCES. THERE MUST BE VICTORIES. THERE MUST BE A RUSSIAN UKRAINE, THERE MUST, THERE MUST, THERE MUST

    How you gonna do it, you fat fucking FT twat?
    You know he's right though, don't you.
    He is literally saying WE MUST HAVE GRAVITY OR WE WILL FLOAT AWAY INTO SPACE

    Only a fucking dimwit spit-roasted by stupidity would think this is incisive, or enlightening, or impressive journalism

    Actual cretins enjoy this shit, they are welcome to it
    Fortunately we have a PM who has a 'growth plan'. She's not sharing it just yet but I sleep easier knowing she has a plan.
    So do I. Especially as her rival for the PM job had a 'shrink plan' that he was very frank about - boasting about his 'realistic' approach.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 2,760
    edited October 2

    In all the stress and upset a nice gesture

    In the street where my son and his family live a large bucket of apples lies at a neighbours gate

    Anyone passing can help themselves to an apple or two, and the neighbour just keeps filling the bucket from her apple trees

    We really do need happy stories

    We have a Bramley with more apples than we can deal with and did the same. Last year we had too many plums. It might be an urban street but why not? Waste is bad. Surprisingly, none of it got thrown about by schoolkids.

    The spare eating apples are going to the scratter, though.
This discussion has been closed.