Howdy, Stranger!

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

BoJo’s resignation – “Right or Wrong”: GE2019 Tories think the latter – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited January 2023 in General
BoJo’s resignation – “Right or Wrong”: GE2019 Tories think the latter – politicalbetting.com

Do Britons believe the Conservative Party made the right or wrong decision in asking Boris Johnson to resign? (4-5 Jan)Right 51% (+4)Wrong 35% (-2)Don't know 14% (-2)Changes +/- 21 Oct (when Truss was PM)55% of 2019 Conservative voters believe it was the wrong decision. pic.twitter.com/p8Cg8YD6la

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,911
    While not wanting to over-interpret MOE moves, it looks like voters are becoming less enamoured of Johnson over time, which should be a relief for Sunak. On the other hand, the move must be especially pronounced for non 2019 Tory voters since the increase is bigger for all voters than for 2019 Tory voters. I am guessing that this reflects the fact that most people see Sunak as an improvement on Truss, making them hanker less for a Johnson comeback, although that seems to have been a bigger factor for non-Tories than for Tory voters. That is another signal that the 2019 Tory voter coalition - which was less wealthy, posh and Southern than normal - isn't sold on Sunak. I maintain my view that Sunak can stem Tory losses but not enough to form a government after the next election, and probably not enough to prevent a Labour majority. I think that under Johnson the bottom of the range of potential Tory electoral outcomes would have been lower, the median would be lower too, but the top would be higher.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150
    First, unlike Boris in the last leadership election
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,911
    Oh and first apparently.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited January 2023
    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total there will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,957
    HYUFD said:

    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total their will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

    You are ignoring the Trussterfuck that came between.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    HYUFD said:

    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total their will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

    You are ignoring the Trussterfuck that came between.
    Truss was even worse than Boris and Rishi as PM
  • No Tory poll leads for 1 year, 1 month and 4 days.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,395
    This may be unfair, but I would appreciate it if Our Gracious Host (and commenters more knowledgeable than I) would bracket that "reasonable possibility" with numbers. Would 5 percent to 25 percent be a "reasonable" interpretation?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,607

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,957
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total their will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

    You are ignoring the Trussterfuck that came between.
    Truss was even worse than Boris and Rishi as PM
    Is my point. You can't do a read across from Boris to Sunak without recognising how far things dropped under Truss - and Rishi is taking some steps to turn the brand around.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    I wonder what the equivalent figures for defenestrating Thatcher would have been in May 1991?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,607
    OT

    This might be more important

    https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/gb-hypothetical-voting-intention-20-21-october-2022/

    Boris means a slightly increased vote share (4%) but not even vaguely enough to turn things around.

    I cannot see a successful challenge to Sunak, unless the challenger can present a narrative that they will, at least, pull things back to level with Labour. Simply swapping horses, again, for little or no apparent gain.....

    That's even before the issue of Boris himself comes up.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
    Which is what’s happened with the ‘legal’ weed dispensaries in the States. You get a known quantity of a known product, along with an information sheet as you’d see with any other drug from a pharmacy.

    People who want cocaine or MDMA, want cocaine or MDMA, not some random powder or pill that could be anything, and increasingly could be something really damn dangerous like fentanyl.

    Alternatively, go down the Singapore/Bangkok/Dubai route, and build *lots* more prisons.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150
    edited January 2023

    OT

    This might be more important

    https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/gb-hypothetical-voting-intention-20-21-october-2022/

    Boris means a slightly increased vote share (4%) but not even vaguely enough to turn things around.

    I cannot see a successful challenge to Sunak, unless the challenger can present a narrative that they will, at least, pull things back to level with Labour. Simply swapping horses, again, for little or no apparent gain.....

    That's even before the issue of Boris himself comes up.

    And my sense is that with Boris the Tory vote would trend down over time, whereas with Sunak is seems set to stay steady. Now that's not a great position to be in when you're steady at around or below 30%, but bringing in Boris, getting an immediately lift to say 33% and then drifting back down while doubtless thoroughly trashing the brand in the meantime doesn't feel like a great ROI.

    EDIT: though if you're in the business of throwing the dice then I still see more to fear for the opposition from Boris than Sunak. Boris is more unpredictable - he might also drag Labour down with him by bringing out their shoutiest most partisan instincts.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,563

    This may be unfair, but I would appreciate it if Our Gracious Host (and commenters more knowledgeable than I) would bracket that "reasonable possibility" with numbers. Would 5 percent to 25 percent be a "reasonable" interpretation?

    That would be to seek a spurious precision.

    This chances of his being leader by the next election might better be quantified as more than Fabricant's, but less than Sunak's ?
  • The Big Dog is to be aimed at the Grand National in April.

    The Big Dog won the Munster National and Troytown Chase last autumn, and is quoted between 20/1 and 33/1 for the big one.
    https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/were-putting-all-our-eggs-in-one-basket-and-going-for-the-grand-national/595304
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited January 2023

    The Big Dog is to be aimed at the Grand National in April.

    The Big Dog won the Munster National and Troytown Chase last autumn, and is quoted between 20/1 and 33/1 for the big one.
    https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/were-putting-all-our-eggs-in-one-basket-and-going-for-the-grand-national/595304

    The first dog to run in the National? ;)

    (Apart from all the three-legged nags I’ve inadvertently backed over the years. One should have learned by now, that a 40-horse handicapped steeplechase over more than four miles, is going to be a lottery!)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,607
    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
    Which is what’s happened with the ‘legal’ weed dispensaries in the States. You get a known quantity of a known product, along with an information sheet as you’d see with any other drug from a pharmacy.

    People who want cocaine or MDMA, want cocaine or MDMA, not some random powder or pill that could be anything, and increasingly could be something really damn dangerous like fentanyl.

    Alternatively, go down the Singapore/Bangkok/Dubai route, and build *lots* more prisons.
    No one has eliminated drugs by state power. Even the most totalitarian regimes did not succeed in doing so.
  • Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
    Which is what’s happened with the ‘legal’ weed dispensaries in the States. You get a known quantity of a known product, along with an information sheet as you’d see with any other drug from a pharmacy.

    People who want cocaine or MDMA, want cocaine or MDMA, not some random powder or pill that could be anything, and increasingly could be something really damn dangerous like fentanyl.

    Alternatively, go down the Singapore/Bangkok/Dubai route, and build *lots* more prisons.
    No one has eliminated drugs by state power. Even the most totalitarian regimes did not succeed in doing so.
    And our highest security prisons are full of them.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715

    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
    Which is what’s happened with the ‘legal’ weed dispensaries in the States. You get a known quantity of a known product, along with an information sheet as you’d see with any other drug from a pharmacy.

    People who want cocaine or MDMA, want cocaine or MDMA, not some random powder or pill that could be anything, and increasingly could be something really damn dangerous like fentanyl.

    Alternatively, go down the Singapore/Bangkok/Dubai route, and build *lots* more prisons.
    No one has eliminated drugs by state power. Even the most totalitarian regimes did not succeed in doing so.
    My understanding is that Thailand has made cannabis legal. What that will do to the sales of other drugs of abuse we wait to see. I don’t know what the sales of cigarettes in the kingdom are like.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733
    “The more vivid the dream of Johnson’s return becomes, the more certain it should be that the party requires a spell in opposition.” Great column by ⁦@robertshrimsley⁩
    https://enterprise-sharing.ft.com/redeem/1bd58de9-e29c-4f99-ad84-a443eef4f3a5
  • On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.
  • Scott_xP said:

    “The more vivid the dream of Johnson’s return becomes, the more certain it should be that the party requires a spell in opposition.” Great column by ⁦@robertshrimsley⁩
    https://enterprise-sharing.ft.com/redeem/1bd58de9-e29c-4f99-ad84-a443eef4f3a5

    Robert Shrimsley does some great articles from time to time but, a bit like Simon Kuper, you have to realise that everything is seen through the prism of Brexit and therefore that colours their view.

    Oh, hold on a minute...
  • On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
  • On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    I am not sure I would regard it as Putinism. I see little evidence of a desire to bomb ones neighbours back to the stone age - even if they are French.

    I think it would be more accurate to describe it as Trumpism. That absolute certainty that power was stolen and that only one messianic figure can put things right.
  • No Tory poll leads for 1 year, 1 month and 4 days.

    Just how long do you think you can keep doing these reports, Sunil?

    Do you have any children who could take over from you one day?
  • This may be unfair, but I would appreciate it if Our Gracious Host (and commenters more knowledgeable than I) would bracket that "reasonable possibility" with numbers. Would 5 percent to 25 percent be a "reasonable" interpretation?

    Sounds reasonable to me, Jim.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,211

    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
    Which is what’s happened with the ‘legal’ weed dispensaries in the States. You get a known quantity of a known product, along with an information sheet as you’d see with any other drug from a pharmacy.

    People who want cocaine or MDMA, want cocaine or MDMA, not some random powder or pill that could be anything, and increasingly could be something really damn dangerous like fentanyl.

    Alternatively, go down the Singapore/Bangkok/Dubai route, and build *lots* more prisons.
    No one has eliminated drugs by state power. Even the most totalitarian regimes did not succeed in doing so.
    My understanding is that Thailand has made cannabis legal. What that will do to the sales of other drugs of abuse we wait to see. I don’t know what the sales of cigarettes in the kingdom are like.
    Yep. Dope is legal here in bangers. Shops everywhere. Disconcerting
  • I'm going a bit @Scott_xP here but there might be a slight issue with using the documents stored at Trump's place to bring him down:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/10/politics/biden-classified-documents-trump-garland/index.html
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    That great fount of Anglophilia, the NYT:

    Has Prince Harry’s Confessional Tour Run Its Course?
    Even in the United States, which has a high tolerance for redemptive stories about overcoming trauma and family dysfunction, the tide seems to be turning.


    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/09/books/prince-harry-book-royal-family.html
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,252

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total their will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

    You are ignoring the Trussterfuck that came between.
    Truss was even worse than Boris and Rishi as PM
    Is my point. You can't do a read across from Boris to Sunak without recognising how far things dropped under Truss - and Rishi is taking some steps to turn the brand around.
    The car has been driven over the cliff. Sunak has applied the brakes and is attempting a three point turn before the tide comes in. Driving it back up the cliff looks tricky, however.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    edited January 2023

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total their will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

    You are ignoring the Trussterfuck that came between.
    Truss was even worse than Boris and Rishi as PM
    Is my point. You can't do a read across from Boris to Sunak without recognising how far things dropped under Truss - and Rishi is taking some steps to turn the brand around.
    Quite the opposite actually. I am surprised how quickly Sunak and his government have become the problem. He just doesn’t look or Sound like a PM. If viewed as out of touch, it’s the same thing as not trusted to deliver.

    The polling truth, and by all means argue with me, a big drop under Truss, a bit of a limp recovery under Sunak honeymoon, which stalled, and Tories are now slipping backwards through the 20’s.

    Why? What are the drivers to what happened and is happening in polling?

    Truss did not drop at first is the truth. In fact her initial polls showed IMPROVEMENT on Boris last ones. The drop occurred after a politically unpopular budget on eve of Labour conference, a budget harshly treated by the media as an economically disastrous one. The problems Truss had, over borrowed over taxed for many giveaways, were not actually predicted by Sunak but CAUSED by Sunak in his profligate time as chancellor.

    The Labour conference itself was very “meh”, nothing special to excite the voters.

    Conclusion is the actual fall in Tory support under Truss was largely a contrivance in much the same Hunt and Sunak being an answer to the Truss problem is a contrivance too. The actual economic mess was 100% created by Boris and Sunak before Truss gained power. The actual problem isn’t Truss and her agenda, it was the problems Boris and Sunak left her with - and this will continue to be reflected in the polling for as long as PM Sunak remains there, as the architect of the mess dragging the Tories down.

    No voting recovery under Sunak, the voters know he is to blame.
  • On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
  • Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    Michael Green says he does not remember who was in the picture when it was taken.

    Which is not good news for BoZo
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    Yes Putinist is too specific to Russia to work well as a more general term. Populist (and possibly Trumpist) covers it just fine for the political narcissists elsewhere.
  • On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:
    Yep. Tick from me. Only way I'll kick the wretched addiction. And if not a total ban I like the NZ age ratchet. Either way JFDI. There is zero downside.
    Absolutely no way that banning an addictive drug will lead to illegal activity, is there?

    If we legalised and regulated drugs, we could defund some really extraordinary arseholes. Just for a start.
    Yes. Two things seem obvious to me. It's best that illegal drugs are legalised, so that their content can be regulated, they can be taxed and the drugs gangs are defunded, and that as few people take the drugs as possible, to reduce the harmful health effects.

    This also implies that if we could develop similar drugs with fewer harmful side effects then we'd be on to a winner, but there seems to be a puritanical reluctance for such research.
    They already exist. Many illegal drugs are worse substitutes for the medical drugs that people previously used recreationally.

    By getting rid of Meth etc and replacing them with safer drugs, at fixed, known concentrations, vast amounts of damage to people could be avoided.
    Which is what’s happened with the ‘legal’ weed dispensaries in the States. You get a known quantity of a known product, along with an information sheet as you’d see with any other drug from a pharmacy.

    People who want cocaine or MDMA, want cocaine or MDMA, not some random powder or pill that could be anything, and increasingly could be something really damn dangerous like fentanyl.

    Alternatively, go down the Singapore/Bangkok/Dubai route, and build *lots* more prisons.
    No one has eliminated drugs by state power. Even the most totalitarian regimes did not succeed in doing so.
    My understanding is that Thailand has made cannabis legal. What that will do to the sales of other drugs of abuse we wait to see. I don’t know what the sales of cigarettes in the kingdom are like.
    Yep. Dope is legal here in bangers. Shops everywhere. Disconcerting
    I thought so; son has reported that the two teenage grandchildren there have tried it. Don’t think they’re all that enthused by it.
  • Mrs Freeman not available for comment on Mr Freeman's timing problems.


  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,042
    edited January 2023

    Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    I think that's the first time I've heard Shapps described as a staunch anything.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    edited January 2023

    Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    Surely Shapps’ loyalty is to himself. Or whatever incarnation he is using at the time!
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,252
    Selebian said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    The last Yougov in June 2022 before Boris resigned the next month had the Tories on 33% and RefUK on 3%.

    The latest Yougov has the Tories on 25% with RefUK on 7%.

    So unless and until Rishi gets the Tory voteshare back over 30% and squeezes the RefUK total their will always be some wanting to bring Boris back

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary

    You are ignoring the Trussterfuck that came between.
    Truss was even worse than Boris and Rishi as PM
    Is my point. You can't do a read across from Boris to Sunak without recognising how far things dropped under Truss - and Rishi is taking some steps to turn the brand around.
    The car has been driven over the cliff. Sunak has applied the brakes and is attempting a three point turn before the tide comes in. Driving it back up the cliff looks tricky, however.
    And Johnson is loitering around, looking to nick the alloy wheels and the stereo if Sunak's not paying attention.
  • Mrs Freeman not available for comment on Mr Freeman's timing problems.


    Better luck next time!

    Though it IS shocking, to find a senior Tory MP who believes that UK is part of Europe!

    Surely this in grounds for removing the whip, and/or deselection by his local CUPers?
  • Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    Surely Shapps’ loyalty is to himself. Or whatever internation, he is using at the time!
    That's why this is such a bad sign (for BJ. Good for the rest of us).

    I'd forgotten he was Home Sec for the last 6 days of the Trussdammerung.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    Is that right? As many Dems are pro Putin as GOPs? Didn't think so.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    Mrs Freeman not available for comment on Mr Freeman's timing problems.


    From The Times

    Around 1:30am, Times headline was about a failed European satellite launch. Which surprised EU citizens as there was no ESA launch yesterday.

    It is true that so far Britain is still (for how long remains the question) member of the ESA. The Daily Express was gloating this as a success of Global Brexit UK. This morning, this quoted newspaper was obliged to acknowledged the unsuccessful mission. Quoting the original article with "A major win for post-Brexit Britain, putting it in the lead in the European space race".
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
    You are welcome to try to define your use of the term in an analytically consistent way if you believe I am wrong.
  • kinabalu said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    Is that right? As many Dems are pro Putin as GOPs? Didn't think so.
    Here are findings from December 2022 poll

    Sharply reduce U.S. military aid to Ukraine?

    Democrats
    favor = 34%, oppose = 66%

    Republicans
    favor = 58%, oppose = 42%

    Independents
    favor = 47%, oppose = 52%

    More of interest in this poll, here is link to report by pollster:

    https://law.marquette.edu/poll/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/MLSPSC11PressRelease_NationalIssues.pdf
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263

    kinabalu said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    Is that right? As many Dems are pro Putin as GOPs? Didn't think so.
    Here are findings from December 2022 poll

    Sharply reduce U.S. military aid to Ukraine?

    Democrats
    favor = 34%, oppose = 66%

    Republicans
    favor = 58%, oppose = 42%

    Independents
    favor = 47%, oppose = 52%

    More of interest in this poll, here is link to report by pollster:

    https://law.marquette.edu/poll/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/MLSPSC11PressRelease_NationalIssues.pdf
    Quite significant numbers. Republicans who favour more and more money spent on Ukraine are swimming against the tide. I doubt if there's much opposition to intelligence support and supply of hardware, but the "open checkbook" period is probably coming to an end.
  • kinabalu said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    Is that right? As many Dems are pro Putin as GOPs? Didn't think so.
    Here are findings from December 2022 poll

    Sharply reduce U.S. military aid to Ukraine?

    Democrats
    favor = 34%, oppose = 66%

    Republicans
    favor = 58%, oppose = 42%

    Independents
    favor = 47%, oppose = 52%

    More of interest in this poll, here is link to report by pollster:

    https://law.marquette.edu/poll/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/MLSPSC11PressRelease_NationalIssues.pdf
    Quite significant numbers. Republicans who favour more and more money spent on Ukraine are swimming against the tide. I doubt if there's much opposition to intelligence support and supply of hardware, but the "open checkbook" period is probably coming to an end.
    Makes sense HOWEVER do NOT think that is really the case, the dynamic in DC still favors UKR methinks.

    BUT we shall see.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
    There's a wider topic to discuss here about different types of populist leader. I would tend to group them into a number of categories, not distinguishing left and right (as there are examples of both in most categories). For example:

    - Amoral Scoundrels: rough diamonds, loved and loathed in equal measure, often forgiven ethical transgressions that more earnest politicians would be crucified for. GSOH, compelling speakers. Johnson, Berlusconi, Marcos, Mobutu
    - Narcissistic Trolls: thrive on conflict, love to insult and bully opponents, but usually very thin skinned when things turn bad for them. Trump, Bolsonaro, Ahmedinejad
    - Steely eyed mob bosses: Quieter, exude quiet menace, make use of henchmen to do much of their dirty work. Earn their initial popularity from the appearance of competence and stability. Eventually decline into a spiral of paranoia, purges and mistrust of everyone. Putin, Erdogan, Xi
    - True ideologues: the rare examples who really do believe in their mad theories. Tend to struggle to get elected unless they deploy versions of the other 3 tactics. Often live surprisingly austere lives. Corbyn, Milosevic, Hitler
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 3,866
    edited January 2023
    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.

    And, of course, had the UK listened to the anti-war voices at the time of the Iraq invasion, the global South might have been a bit more supportive of the Western position on Ukraine. As it is, many of them see the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the same light as the US/UK invasion of Iraq - powerful countries doing as they please and nothing to do with us.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,458
    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
    There's a wider topic to discuss here about different types of populist leader. I would tend to group them into a number of categories, not distinguishing left and right (as there are examples of both in most categories). For example:

    - Amoral Scoundrels: rough diamonds, loved and loathed in equal measure, often forgiven ethical transgressions that more earnest politicians would be crucified for. GSOH, compelling speakers. Johnson, Berlusconi, Marcos, Mobutu
    - Narcissistic Trolls: thrive on conflict, love to insult and bully opponents, but usually very thin skinned when things turn bad for them. Trump, Bolsonaro, Ahmedinejad
    - Steely eyed mob bosses: Quieter, exude quiet menace, make use of henchmen to do much of their dirty work. Earn their initial popularity from the appearance of competence and stability. Eventually decline into a spiral of paranoia, purges and mistrust of everyone. Putin, Erdogan, Xi
    - True ideologues: the rare examples who really do believe in their mad theories. Tend to struggle to get elected unless they deploy versions of the other 3 tactics. Often live surprisingly austere lives. Corbyn, Milosevic, Hitler
    You're very harsh putting Corbyn in with Milosevic and Hitler! Surely he's more of an eccentric allotment socialist?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847

    Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    If only we could delete him as easily. I still think about him at least 3 times a day and start to tremble. Happens at the oddest of moments - always unbidden.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.
    What has Farage opposed? Looking at his timeline I can see him making comments about "Germany and other EU states funding Putin's war machine" but there's nothing comparable to Putin's apologists in the AfD or GOP.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
    There's a wider topic to discuss here about different types of populist leader. I would tend to group them into a number of categories, not distinguishing left and right (as there are examples of both in most categories). For example:

    - Amoral Scoundrels: rough diamonds, loved and loathed in equal measure, often forgiven ethical transgressions that more earnest politicians would be crucified for. GSOH, compelling speakers. Johnson, Berlusconi, Marcos, Mobutu
    - Narcissistic Trolls: thrive on conflict, love to insult and bully opponents, but usually very thin skinned when things turn bad for them. Trump, Bolsonaro, Ahmedinejad
    - Steely eyed mob bosses: Quieter, exude quiet menace, make use of henchmen to do much of their dirty work. Earn their initial popularity from the appearance of competence and stability. Eventually decline into a spiral of paranoia, purges and mistrust of everyone. Putin, Erdogan, Xi
    - True ideologues: the rare examples who really do believe in their mad theories. Tend to struggle to get elected unless they deploy versions of the other 3 tactics. Often live surprisingly austere lives. Corbyn, Milosevic, Hitler
    You're very harsh putting Corbyn in with Milosevic and Hitler! Surely he's more of an eccentric allotment socialist?
    Yes, it's a nice post from Tim but I'd swap out Jeremy for Pol Pot in Category 4.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,522
    .

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.
    I mean, this is just utterly ridiculous in its own terms.
  • TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.
    What has Farage opposed? Looking at his timeline I can see him making comments about "Germany and other EU states funding Putin's war machine" but there's nothing comparable to Putin's apologists in the AfD or GOP.
    Farage blamed the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the EU and NATO for provoking Russia. A Putin apologist if ever there was one.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,522

    Mrs Freeman not available for comment on Mr Freeman's timing problems.


    Better luck next time!

    Though it IS shocking, to find a senior Tory MP who believes that UK is part of Europe!

    Surely this in grounds for removing the whip, and/or deselection by his local CUPers?
    The UK is part of Europe. You're being a stereotypical American, showing you know nothing of geography outside your country's borders...
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150
    kinabalu said:

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
    There's a wider topic to discuss here about different types of populist leader. I would tend to group them into a number of categories, not distinguishing left and right (as there are examples of both in most categories). For example:

    - Amoral Scoundrels: rough diamonds, loved and loathed in equal measure, often forgiven ethical transgressions that more earnest politicians would be crucified for. GSOH, compelling speakers. Johnson, Berlusconi, Marcos, Mobutu
    - Narcissistic Trolls: thrive on conflict, love to insult and bully opponents, but usually very thin skinned when things turn bad for them. Trump, Bolsonaro, Ahmedinejad
    - Steely eyed mob bosses: Quieter, exude quiet menace, make use of henchmen to do much of their dirty work. Earn their initial popularity from the appearance of competence and stability. Eventually decline into a spiral of paranoia, purges and mistrust of everyone. Putin, Erdogan, Xi
    - True ideologues: the rare examples who really do believe in their mad theories. Tend to struggle to get elected unless they deploy versions of the other 3 tactics. Often live surprisingly austere lives. Corbyn, Milosevic, Hitler
    You're very harsh putting Corbyn in with Milosevic and Hitler! Surely he's more of an eccentric allotment socialist?
    Yes, it's a nice post from Tim but I'd swap out Jeremy for Pol Pot in Category 4.
    For clarity I'm not suggesting moral equivalence (nor between Boris and Mobutu for that matter)
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.
    What has Farage opposed? Looking at his timeline I can see him making comments about "Germany and other EU states funding Putin's war machine" but there's nothing comparable to Putin's apologists in the AfD or GOP.
    Farage blamed the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the EU and NATO for provoking Russia. A Putin apologist if ever there was one.
    He's on record as rating Putin the leader he admires the most in the whole wide world. Although this might have been before his true love emerged to win the WH in 2016.
  • Driver said:

    Mrs Freeman not available for comment on Mr Freeman's timing problems.


    Better luck next time!

    Though it IS shocking, to find a senior Tory MP who believes that UK is part of Europe!

    Surely this in grounds for removing the whip, and/or deselection by his local CUPers?
    The UK is part of Europe. You're being a stereotypical American, showing you know nothing of geography outside your country's borders...
    Ha! Ha! Ha! In THIS case, when you assume, you make an ass out of . . . you.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733
    New #BringBackBoris read in @TheSun: Tory plotters set summer deadline for Rishi Sunak to turn the Conservative polls around before they move to install Boris Johnson back in Downing Street https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/21000032/boris-johnson-allies-set-deadline-to-oust-rishi/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847
    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    You are welcome to your opinion. Flawed, ideological and inaccurate though it is.
    There's a wider topic to discuss here about different types of populist leader. I would tend to group them into a number of categories, not distinguishing left and right (as there are examples of both in most categories). For example:

    - Amoral Scoundrels: rough diamonds, loved and loathed in equal measure, often forgiven ethical transgressions that more earnest politicians would be crucified for. GSOH, compelling speakers. Johnson, Berlusconi, Marcos, Mobutu
    - Narcissistic Trolls: thrive on conflict, love to insult and bully opponents, but usually very thin skinned when things turn bad for them. Trump, Bolsonaro, Ahmedinejad
    - Steely eyed mob bosses: Quieter, exude quiet menace, make use of henchmen to do much of their dirty work. Earn their initial popularity from the appearance of competence and stability. Eventually decline into a spiral of paranoia, purges and mistrust of everyone. Putin, Erdogan, Xi
    - True ideologues: the rare examples who really do believe in their mad theories. Tend to struggle to get elected unless they deploy versions of the other 3 tactics. Often live surprisingly austere lives. Corbyn, Milosevic, Hitler
    You're very harsh putting Corbyn in with Milosevic and Hitler! Surely he's more of an eccentric allotment socialist?
    Yes, it's a nice post from Tim but I'd swap out Jeremy for Pol Pot in Category 4.
    For clarity I'm not suggesting moral equivalence (nor between Boris and Mobutu for that matter)
    Absolutely. Give me Mobutu any day.
  • kinabalu said:

    Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    If only we could delete him as easily. I still think about him at least 3 times a day and start to tremble. Happens at the oddest of moments - always unbidden.
    Took me a minute to recall his wife's name yesterday. Do I celebrate the beginning of the healing process or register alarm at first sign of dementia?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,522
    Scott_xP said:
    Apparently this means the Tories don't need a spell in opposition.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847

    kinabalu said:

    Shappsy's airbrushing Bojo out of history testerday surely says something bad for Boris about his comeback prospects? Staunch Bojoite, I thought.

    If only we could delete him as easily. I still think about him at least 3 times a day and start to tremble. Happens at the oddest of moments - always unbidden.
    Took me a minute to recall his wife's name yesterday. Do I celebrate the beginning of the healing process or register alarm at first sign of dementia?
    I'm sure it's the first. You're getting clean. Envious.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,540
    Great news on UK science:

    UK genome project a ‘step change’ in tackling respiratory viruses

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/jan/10/uk-genome-project-respiratory-viruses-sanger-institute
  • kamskikamski Posts: 4,199
    My anti-vax friends have pointed me in the direction of this (preprint) study:

    "The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected. A simplistic explanation might be that those who received more doses were more likely to be individuals at higher risk of COVID-19. A small proportion of individuals may have fit this description. However, the majority of subjects in this study were generally young individuals and all were eligible to have received at least 3 doses of vaccine by the study start date, and which they had every opportunity to do. Therefore, those who received fewer than 3 doses (>45% of individuals in the study) were not those ineligible to receive the vaccine, but those who chose not to follow the CDC’s recommendations on remaining updated with COVID-19 vaccination, and one could reasonably expect these individuals to have been more likely to have exhibited higher risk-taking behavior. Despite this, their risk of acquiring COVID-19 was lower than those who received a larger number of prior vaccine doses. This is not the only study to find a possible association with more prior vaccine doses and higher risk of COVID-19. A large study found that those who had an Omicron variant infection after previously receiving three doses of vaccine had a higher risk of reinfection than those who had an Omicron variant infection after previously receiving two doses of vaccine [21]. Another study found that receipt of two or three doses of a mRNA vaccine following prior COVID-19 was associated with a higher risk of reinfection than receipt of a single dose [7]. We still have a lot to learn about protection from COVID-19 vaccination, and in addition to a vaccine’s effectiveness it is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed."

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1.full



  • OMG

    BORIS PLOTTERS Boris Johnson allies set deadline to move against Rishi Sunak and install their man in No10
    Noa Hoffman
    Published: 16:26, 10 Jan 2023Updated: 16:34, 10 Jan 2023

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/21000032/boris-johnson-allies-set-deadline-to-oust-rishi/
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    edited January 2023

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.

    And, of course, had the UK listened to the anti-war voices at the time of the Iraq invasion, the global South might have been a bit more supportive of the Western position on Ukraine. As it is, many of them see the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the same light as the US/UK invasion of Iraq - powerful countries doing as they please and nothing to do with us.
    It is true the Faragists are pro Putin, but is that the same as pro Russia if they dislike Putin’s internal critics? A lot of Russian opposition are very nationalistic, and on record as would have this dispute with Ukraine too, but would they have allowed Soviet Flags on the invading tanks?

    On recommendation from my counsellor. I watched a Polish film last month, which was a bit of a hoot. Almost like a “the Cossacks are revolting” Carry On. For example at the start the hero rescues the arch enemy by mistake. He then recruits someone (who would be played by Bernard Breslaw in carry on version) who can hold a heavy German sword in one hand, and won’t have sex till he can take a hatrick of heads in one swoop, and keeps getting stuck on just 2 beheadings each fight.

    In this film the poles bossed Ukraine, in so far as Ukraine actually existed as a nation state, and in so far as poles existed as united polish people. The battles was often one big double crossing tear up between poles, Cossacks, ruskies (called something I can’t remember), Turks, and Hetmen (whatever they are).

    Although that was all hundreds of years ago, more recently in 1939, in Lyiv, poles made up 70% of the inhabitants, and used the war to kick the shit out of Ukraine minority. My thoughts are, and correct me where wrong, although this horrible 21st century war is clearly big bully Russia picking on Ukraine over its modern borders, it provokes all sorts of complicated history in the region - I would go as far as to say poles being nice to Ukraine nationalists could be because even greater hatred of Russian Nationalism - because a lot of this taking in refugees and sending weapons don’t match history, ancient and modern.

    This one https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ogniem_i_mieczem
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772

    No Tory poll leads for 1 year, 1 month and 4 days.

    Just how long do you think you can keep doing these reports, Sunil?

    Do you have any children who could take over from you one day?
    He only needs to create a simple Python script to do it for him.
  • Scott_xP said:

    New #BringBackBoris read in @TheSun: Tory plotters set summer deadline for Rishi Sunak to turn the Conservative polls around before they move to install Boris Johnson back in Downing Street https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/21000032/boris-johnson-allies-set-deadline-to-oust-rishi/

    How much of this is true and how much is just some kind of coping mechanism by the euro-sceptic right-wing media? With Boris (and Truss put the icing on it) they saw pretty much every certainty they've cherished for decades crash in flames. The concept of the cut-through-the-crap, all-the-solutions conservative commentator pretty much died with Boris. You can see why they want his demise to be all a bad dream.
  • Scott_xP said:

    New #BringBackBoris read in @TheSun: Tory plotters set summer deadline for Rishi Sunak to turn the Conservative polls around before they move to install Boris Johnson back in Downing Street https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/21000032/boris-johnson-allies-set-deadline-to-oust-rishi/

    How much of this is true and how much is just some kind of coping mechanism by the euro-sceptic right-wing media? With Boris (and Truss put the icing on it) they saw pretty much every certainty they've cherished for decades crash in flames. The concept of the cut-through-the-crap, all-the-solutions conservative commentator pretty much died with Boris. You can see why they want his demise to be all a bad dream.
    The usual suspects are unveiling a portrait of Fat Man at the Carlton this PM. I think this is just a story hung on that peg.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733
    Meanwhile, Sunak supporters are trying to drum up as much love for their man as they can. In Tory WhatsApp groups MPs including Angela Richardson are frequently sending hype man messages to encourage unity
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,607

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    It’s about wish fulfilment

    - Boris is pro Putin
    - What about the massive, overt support for Ukraine over a decade, military and economic?
    - But Boris is Bad!
    - I want him to be a Putinist!
    - He must be a Putinist, because I want it!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    No Tory poll leads for 1 year, 1 month and 4 days.

    Just how long do you think you can keep doing these reports, Sunil?

    Do you have any children who could take over from you one day?
    He only needs to create a simple Python script to do it for him.
    Or a real programming language...
  • TimSTimS Posts: 9,150
    At 21.5gw we have now blown through the previous al time record for wind power set on 30th Dec. Nice one, particularly as demand (at 43gw) is about as high as it gets in the UK.

    https://grid.energynumbers.info/

  • On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    It’s about wish fulfilment

    - Boris is pro Putin
    - What about the massive, overt support for Ukraine over a decade, military and economic?
    - But Boris is Bad!
    - I want him to be a Putinist!
    - He must be a Putinist, because I want it!
    Reductio ad absurdum.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,522

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    They way you use "Putinist" as a catch-all word for anything you don't like renders it meaningless other than as a term of abuse.
    It’s about wish fulfilment

    - Boris is pro Putin
    - What about the massive, overt support for Ukraine over a decade, military and economic?
    - But Boris is Bad!
    - I want him to be a Putinist!
    - He must be a Putinist, because I want it!
    Reductio ad absurdum.
    Difficult to get more absurdam than "Putinist can mean opponent of Putin".
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,607

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.

    And, of course, had the UK listened to the anti-war voices at the time of the Iraq invasion, the global South might have been a bit more supportive of the Western position on Ukraine. As it is, many of them see the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the same light as the US/UK invasion of Iraq - powerful countries doing as they please and nothing to do with us.
    It is true the Faragists are pro Putin, but is that the same as pro Russia if they dislike Putin’s internal critics? A lot of Russian opposition are very nationalistic, and on record as would have this dispute with Ukraine too, but would they have allowed Soviet Flags on the invading tanks?

    On recommendation from my counsellor. I watched a Polish film last month, which was a bit of a hoot. Almost like a “the Cossacks are revolting” Carry On. For example at the start the hero rescues the arch enemy by mistake. He then recruits someone (who would be played by Bernard Breslaw in carry on version) who can hold a heavy German sword in one hand, and won’t have sex till he can take a hatrick of heads in one swoop, and keeps getting stuck on just 2 beheadings each fight.

    In this film the poles bossed Ukraine, in so far as Ukraine actually existed as a nation state, and in so far as poles existed as united polish people. The battles was often one big double crossing tear up between poles, Cossacks, ruskies (called something I can’t remember), Turks, and Hetmen (whatever they are).

    Although that was all hundreds of years ago, more recently in 1939, in Lyiv, poles made up 70% of the inhabitants, and used the war to kick the shit out of Ukraine minority. My thoughts are, and correct me where wrong, although this horrible 21st century war is clearly big bully Russia picking on Ukraine over its modern borders, it provokes all sorts of complicated history in the region - I would go as far as to say poles being nice to Ukraine nationalists could be because even greater hatred of Russian Nationalism - because a lot of this taking in refugees and sending weapons don’t match history, ancient and modern.

    This one https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ogniem_i_mieczem
    Post 1989, in Poland and some other countries in the area, the winning idea on the Nationalist Right has gone something like this -

    - If we don’t stand together, history tells us we will be picked off by the Great Powers, one by one.
    - Therefore we must ally with each other and gain support in Europe as well.
    - Therefore we must bury the old quarrels and forget irredentism. We must defend the 1945 borders - of all of us.

    The contrast with the brain fuck in Greater Russian Nationalism is remarkable.
  • dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    Plan on getting my copy in say 3 months . . . for $1 from a bargain bin.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    TimS said:

    At 21.5gw we have now blown through the previous al time record for wind power set on 30th Dec. Nice one, particularly as demand (at 43gw) is about as high as it gets in the UK.

    https://grid.energynumbers.info/

    It says 17.20 on here which is the highest I've ever seen.

    https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk
  • dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    Plan on getting my copy in say 3 months . . . for $1 from a bargain bin.
    Got mine free as a sign up to audible on amazon

    It's only 4 months to Coronation. Market needed on Haz/Meg to attend yes/no. He has made it very difficult.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 2,800
    FPT:
    Leon said:

    HELP

    I am belatedly addicted to podcasts thanks to Danny Robins’ Battersea Poltergeist and the follow ups. They are brilliant to listen to during tedious chores - long drives, the gym, household tasks, waiting for the go-go bars to open

    Can anyone recommend some really great podcasts? I like anything on - you guessed it - Wokeness, AI, aliens, ghosts, generally weird things, futurology, mad history, Forteana, extreme military stuff, wine and cheese

    No politics please, I get an ample share of that here

    Any and all suggestions welcome

    I can recommend 'The End of the World' podcast series by Josh Clark. Might tick a few of your boxes :

    https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-end-of-the-world-with-josh-clark/id1437682381

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Scott_xP said:

    Meanwhile, Sunak supporters are trying to drum up as much love for their man as they can. In Tory WhatsApp groups MPs including Angela Richardson are frequently sending hype man messages to encourage unity

    He's ok, just a bit lightweight. If they were not in a crisis he'd probably be a decent PM, but fantasists imagining Boris would sweep all before him are hardly likely to give him the benefit of the doubt, even if he was a bit more substantial.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,607

    dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    Plan on getting my copy in say 3 months . . . for $1 from a bargain bin.
    Got mine free as a sign up to audible on amazon

    It's only 4 months to Coronation. Market needed on Haz/Meg to attend yes/no. He has made it very difficult.
    IIRC the coronation plan was partly released the other day - only William will be an active part of the service. The rest of Royal Family will simply be spectators. No swearing of oaths by all the Royal Dukes etc.

    This also solves the Andrew problem, so I think it sounds quite probable.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.
    What has Farage opposed? Looking at his timeline I can see him making comments about "Germany and other EU states funding Putin's war machine" but there's nothing comparable to Putin's apologists in the AfD or GOP.
    Farage blamed the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the EU and NATO for provoking Russia. A Putin apologist if ever there was one.
    It is a pretty obvious tell, putting him with the likes of Corbyn and Galloway on the issue.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,847
    dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    I like the idea of it as a Talking Book narrated by Ray Winstone.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,563
    It's not quite Arkell v Pressdram, but a good effort from Dr. Dre's lawyers.

    Marjorie Taylor Greene has been locked out of her Twitter account and her new video has been removed after Dr. Dre took legal action against her for using his music without permission. ...
    https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1612564851049615371

    “One might expect that, as a member of Congress, you might have a passing familiarity with the laws of out country. It’s possible, though, that the laws governing intellectual property are a little too arcane and insufficiently populist for you really to have spent too much time on…”
  • ohnotnow said:

    FPT:

    Leon said:

    HELP

    I am belatedly addicted to podcasts thanks to Danny Robins’ Battersea Poltergeist and the follow ups. They are brilliant to listen to during tedious chores - long drives, the gym, household tasks, waiting for the go-go bars to open

    Can anyone recommend some really great podcasts? I like anything on - you guessed it - Wokeness, AI, aliens, ghosts, generally weird things, futurology, mad history, Forteana, extreme military stuff, wine and cheese

    No politics please, I get an ample share of that here

    Any and all suggestions welcome

    I can recommend 'The End of the World' podcast series by Josh Clark. Might tick a few of your boxes :

    https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-end-of-the-world-with-josh-clark/id1437682381

    Leon (and etc) you've likely heard most of these already, but in case not

    In Our Time episode list, with something for just about everyone:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qykl/episodes/player

    PBer may judge the timeliness (or not) of THIS episode, the latest listed:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001gjcm

    The Great Stink
    In Our Time
    Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the impact of the terrible stench of sewage in the Thames in central London in the hot summer of 1858 and the work of Joseph Bazalgette to fix it.

    [think this is a repeat episode?]
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,702
    edited January 2023
    kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    I like the idea of it as a Talking Book narrated by Ray Winstone.
    Or Danny Dyer from the time he was doing those ‘bad geezers’ and soccer firms documentaries for C4
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited January 2023

    dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    Plan on getting my copy in say 3 months . . . for $1 from a bargain bin.
    Got mine free as a sign up to audible on amazon

    It's only 4 months to Coronation. Market needed on Haz/Meg to attend yes/no. He has made it very difficult.
    I cannot figure out why he would want to go. If even half of what he says is true then if there is going to be some kind of reconciliation all all it certainly isn't going to happen around a major media/ceremonial event which the 'institution' gang of Charlie boy and Wills will be very on brand about, given Harry spends most of his limelight time bemoaning anything to do with the media and the family's focus on institutional things. Wouldn't he just spend the entire time moping?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733
    🔺 NEW: Control room staff who answer 999 calls will walk out tomorrow alongside paramedics in an escalation of NHS strike action that will “intensify risks to patients” https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-anti-strike-law-latest-news-rishi-sunak-pay-deal-nurses-train-2023-rm6j09x8c?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1673370753-1
  • kinabalu said:

    dixiedean said:

    400k copies of Harry's book sold today.
    Second only to the other Harry. Potter that is.

    I like the idea of it as a Talking Book narrated by Ray Winstone.
    Whereas I believe it's actually read by Hazza in person.
  • kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    On Topic - Clear & compelling evidence, that Putinism is alive and kicking in the Conservative Party, as recent events show Putinism remains a potent force within the Republican Party.

    NOT as powerful and dominant as it was a few years ago. But still a power for ill.

    You really think most of the GOP wants Putin to win? Sure, there's a few loud mouth nut jobs but the reason why support for Ukraine is continuing is because there is bipartisan support

    Ps numerically; the nuts in the GOP are counterbalanced by the nuts in the Dems who also want funding to Ukraine to stop - think Ilhan Omar et al
    First, you mistake "Putinism" for "overt support for Valdimir Putin" when the reality is MUCH more nuanced. As exhibited by a Putinist (in his heart & mind) like Boris Johnson vociferously & publicly denouncing Putin & his works, for his own fun and profit.

    And as for Democratic nuts counter-balancing Rep nuts, note that the former have been stifled by the weight of PROGRESSIVE opinion against Russia's invasion and war crimes. For example, the whole Pramila Jayapal letter fiasco.

    Wheres it is still socially acceptable for the likes of Matt Gaetz to snub and outright oppose President Zelensky and whole of UKR's amazing defense of their homeland, and with it the world.
    One of the more clever aspects of Russia's insidious propaganda is that they pick off different political wings in different countries depending on where they see the most fertile ground. Certainly they seem to be much more influential among the US hard right, likewise in France, Hungary and a couple of other locations. Whereas in the UK, Germany and large tracts of the global South they've been courting the "anti-war" far left.
    While the Russians may be courting the "anti-war" far left in the UK and Germany, it's the far right in both of those countries - Farage in the UK and the AfD in Germany - that has been most prominent in its opposition to Western intervention in Ukraine.
    What has Farage opposed? Looking at his timeline I can see him making comments about "Germany and other EU states funding Putin's war machine" but there's nothing comparable to Putin's apologists in the AfD or GOP.
    Farage blamed the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the EU and NATO for provoking Russia. A Putin apologist if ever there was one.
    It is a pretty obvious tell, putting him with the likes of Corbyn and Galloway on the issue.
    Am I misremembering or was it not a popular trope on the right that the EU was provoking Putin by pressing for expansion up to the Russian border, at least before the invasion?
This discussion has been closed.