I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
Boris losing would be a Portillo moment. I suspect for that reason, a lot of people will put a lot of effort to see it happen. I'm still not convinced though. I feel that he will probably stay, and probably win.
I thought the whole point of the Portillo moment was that there wasn't a great Labour effort to unseat him?
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
The good news is I don't see much of a way back economically for Russia even if sanctions are lifted. Nordstream 1 is destroyed, Nordstream 2 mothballed, Europe has already weaned itself off over-dependence on gas and will never again allow itself to become as locked into Russian supplies, and while Putin and his ilk are on the throne the US is not going to allow countries to supply Russia with components for arms manufacture.
Plus, demography is not on Russia's side. It just lost a load of its fighting age men, the birth rate is falling and the population is going to carry on shrinking.
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
He was showing great talent in the Blast before that though part of the reason he didn't draw much excitement until later was his breakthrough was in 2020.
Boris losing would be a Portillo moment. I suspect for that reason, a lot of people will put a lot of effort to see it happen. I'm still not convinced though. I feel that he will probably stay, and probably win.
I thought the whole point of the Portillo moment was that there wasn't a great Labour effort to unseat him?
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
Interesting, I've watched the Hundred since it started and can't recall him at all.
I guess it's similar to Alex Hales in a way, that was what got him back in the England line-up, although is he out again? Dude seems to get himself into trouble all the time
Majority of 12.6 thousand with 10 thousand Labour to squeeze, sounds possible.
Wouldn't need that much mass tactical voting. The seat has lost a chunk of solid Tory countryside and is now even more dominated by the non-Tory towns that make up its name. Since 2019, the District council has gone LibDem, with the Tories almost wiped out. The best hope for the current MP (David Johnston) is that Labour and LibDems both think they can win and fight amongst themselves.
If Johnson has bought the Manor, it's more likely he would go a couple of miles down the road to try his luck in his old Henley seat, where the current MP could be persuadable to step aside.
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
He was showing great talent in the Blast before that though part of the reason he didn't draw much excitement until later was his breakthrough was in 2020.
And we would still be largely unaware of his talent as a Test batsmen if Bairstow were better at golf.
Seems the government have instructed all its mps to be in the HOC for a three line whip on Monday
NIP ?
Plus good to see one of the rail unions accept the pay deal notwithstanding it is the same one the RMT have rejected without balloting all their members
Hasn't he bought a farmhouse in Oxfordshire or something. Sounds like a chicken run might be on the cards
Mid Beds has a vacancy.
Mid Beds also safer than Oxfordshire Tory seats. Wantage and Witney, even Henley are vulnerable to the LDs, all voted Remain and all in the top 50 LD target seats. Leave voting Banbury should be reasonably safe still but even that could fall if Labour won a landslide
Banbury has a few Con-unfriendly boundary changes. You're right that it's at risk if there's a Labour landslide but I expect it to stay blue. It would make sense for Boris, but Victoria Prentis has said she's staying on, and she's liked by her constituency party.
Wantage is a LD stretch target. Witney is more challenging as the non-Tory vote is likely to continue to split between Labour and the LDs. The new Bicester & Woodstock seat is affluent Oxford commuter belt and as such very fertile territory for the LDs. Henley could in theory be a LD gain but I think it's unlikely.
If he goes for an Oxfordshire seat I expect it to be Henley. He has the local connection, John Howell hasn't said he's standing again, and Howell isn't much liked at any rate.
How did the SNP end up with just these 3 candidates ?
It really is a poor choice for their membership to chose from and Labour must think Christmas has come early .
The choice being Mr Angry , Miss Bible Basher and Miss Non-entity .
We spend so much time focussing on the dearth of talent in the upper echelons of the Tory Party that we (especially the large majority of us not resident in Scotland) may simply have failed to notice that the SNP suffers from a similar vacuum?
Has Mr Angry said anything convincing in support of same-sex marriage (and to rebuff the rumours surrounding his convenient-looking absence from the final parliamentary vote on the matter?) If he does, he wins. Miss Bible Basher is already disqualified by her social conservatism and Miss Non-Entity will probably come a cropper likewise for being too chummy (in the view of most of the selectorate, at any rate,) with TERFs.
Mrs Bible Basher, please. And I think she can win. Polling of 2021 SNP voters suggests she's their choice, plus she's generally regarded as competent. The members are even more likely than 2021 voters to prioritise independence above social issues, and they are the electorate. If the members think Forbes will be the best for independence then I suspect they will vote for her.
Was this poll conducted before or after said voters were forced to confront her religious views? The obvious risk for all those "independence matters and nothing else" members is that those views would dog her throughout her leadership and sap away at it in the manner of a female Tim Farron. Quite apart from anything else I'm sure we haven't heard the full extent of her interesting philosophical positions, and they are almost bound to keep coming up if she wins. It helps the desperate to kill the Union membership not a jot if the public discourse is less about the boundless evils of Westminster, and more about whether or not there were dinosaurs in the Garden of Eden.
How did the SNP end up with just these 3 candidates ?
It really is a poor choice for their membership to chose from and Labour must think Christmas has come early .
The choice being Mr Angry , Miss Bible Basher and Miss Non-entity .
We spend so much time focussing on the dearth of talent in the upper echelons of the Tory Party that we (especially the large majority of us not resident in Scotland) may simply have failed to notice that the SNP suffers from a similar vacuum?
Has Mr Angry said anything convincing in support of same-sex marriage (and to rebuff the rumours surrounding his convenient-looking absence from the final parliamentary vote on the matter?) If he does, he wins. Miss Bible Basher is already disqualified by her social conservatism and Miss Non-Entity will probably come a cropper likewise for being too chummy (in the view of most of the selectorate, at any rate,) with TERFs.
Mrs Bible Basher, please. And I think she can win. Polling of 2021 SNP voters suggests she's their choice, plus she's generally regarded as competent. The members are even more likely than 2021 voters to prioritise independence above social issues, and they are the electorate. If the members think Forbes will be the best for independence then I suspect they will vote for her.
Was this poll conducted before or after said voters were forced to confront her religious views? The obvious risk for all those "independence matters and nothing else" members is that those views would dog her throughout her leadership and sap away at it in the manner of a female Tim Farron. Quite apart from anything else I'm sure we haven't heard the full extent of her interesting philosophical positions, and they are almost bound to keep coming up if she wins. It helps the desperate to kill the Union membership not a jot if the public discourse is less about the boundless evils of Westminster, and more about whether or not there were dinosaurs in the Garden of Eden.
That last unfair - morelike the FPC(U) than the FSC or the FSC(C).
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
Can’t really argue with any of this
The Cold War happened for a reason. A hot war meant total annihilation for everyone, so an armed, nasty but essentially peaceful stand off was better. Ukraine will be divided between West and East as Europe was divided post 1945 (and Korea)
Even if Putin is toppled, it is now incredibly unlikely he will be toppled by a peacenik pro-Western successor happy to give up Crimea. The peacenik would then be toppled in turn by some mad warmongering Russian Hitler. Great
100,000-200,000 Russian men have died, defeat is now unthinkable. It’s like us abandoning HS2. Sunk Cost
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
I have little doubt that in the unlikely event that Ukraine successfully captured the Russian city of Belgorod, and the Russian armed forces were unable to counterattack, that Russia would use nuclear weapons to defend itself against Ukrainian conquest of Russian territory.
However, although Russia formally claims the territory of Crimea, Kherson, Zoporizhzhia, Donetsk and Luhansk as part of the Russian Federation, they have since been forced to retreat from the city of Kherson, and did not respond with the use of nuclear weapons. So it has already been proven that Russia regards the status of Ukrainian territory that it has conquered differently to territory within the internationally recognised borders of Russia.
So your argument doesn't follow.
The war may still be heading for a stalemate, if Russia remains able to conscript enough people to replace its losses, and either produce or procure sufficient weaponry and ammunition to keep their army sufficiently supplied that it can keep fighting. But not because of nukes.
The war might well peter out due to both sides simply not having enough personnel to fully contest it. But a stalemate looks like the most likely option.
One step closer to escape from this hostage situation. The rolling strikes make it impossible for those of us reliant on trains to plan anything more than two weeks in advance. The sooner they're all over, the better.
The Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) said its 3,000 members voted overwhelmingly in favour of deals which include a two-year pay rise worth 9%.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
He was showing great talent in the Blast before that though part of the reason he didn't draw much excitement until later was his breakthrough was in 2020.
And we would still be largely unaware of his talent as a Test batsmen if Bairstow were better at golf.
A year ago I would have said 'How the hell do you break your leg playing golf', but as a year ago I managed to break both legs, one spectacularly, while just walking, I'm now surprised he didn't manage both arms as well.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
Can’t really argue with any of this
The Cold War happened for a reason. A hot war meant total annihilation for everyone, so an armed, nasty but essentially peaceful stand off was better. Ukraine will be divided between West and East as Europe was divided post 1945 (and Korea)
Even if Putin is toppled, it is now incredibly unlikely he will be toppled by a peacenik pro-Western successor happy to give up Crimea. The peacenik would then be toppled in turn by some mad warmongering Russian Hitler. Great
100,000-200,000 Russian men have died, defeat is now unthinkable. It’s like us abandoning HS2. Sunk Cost
Do you think we could do a deal, we agree to scrap HS2 if they agree to scrap thr invasion?
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
Can’t really argue with any of this
The Cold War happened for a reason. A hot war meant total annihilation for everyone, so an armed, nasty but essentially peaceful stand off was better. Ukraine will be divided between West and East as Europe was divided post 1945 (and Korea)
Even if Putin is toppled, it is now incredibly unlikely he will be toppled by a peacenik pro-Western successor happy to give up Crimea. The peacenik would then be toppled in turn by some mad warmongering Russian Hitler. Great
100,000-200,000 Russian men have died, defeat is now unthinkable. It’s like us abandoning HS2. Sunk Cost
False analogy. If we "abandon" HS2 now we'll just have to build it in 10 or 20 years. Hopefully in 10 or 20 years Russia will have a leader that doesn't want to repeat Putin's errors.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
"Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder."
I'm far from convinced that's the case. Look at the Second World War: Germany had over 700,000 men in the Caucus in January 1943; the Soviets had a million. And that was just one front for both. The Ukraine war might be the largest land war we've seen for some years, but it's tiny compared to past wars.
Russia is, and wants to remain, a modern society. The modern world requires so many more skilled people than war did 80 years ago: there are loads of jobs that simply did not exist, but are critical to society and to war. We can't just send the Bevan Boys in to perform them as it takes years to learn the skills.
Then there are the demographic issues mentioned below.
One step closer to escape from this hostage situation. The rolling strikes make it impossible for those of us reliant on trains to plan anything more than two weeks in advance. The sooner they're all over, the better.
Was a new deal offered recently? I don't remember reading anything saying so.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
No, I don't agree.
I suspect Russia will implode into a kind of civil war in which competing mafias scramble for control of key resources. Nobody will really want the nukes - too expensive and difficult to manage - although they may be used in strategic bargaining.
Russia, as we have known it for a thousand years, will no more exist than Yugoslavia does today.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Also remember (a) Joanna Cherry is reported to have opened her leadership campaign launch event; and (b) see this
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
Can’t really argue with any of this
The Cold War happened for a reason. A hot war meant total annihilation for everyone, so an armed, nasty but essentially peaceful stand off was better. Ukraine will be divided between West and East as Europe was divided post 1945 (and Korea)
Even if Putin is toppled, it is now incredibly unlikely he will be toppled by a peacenik pro-Western successor happy to give up Crimea. The peacenik would then be toppled in turn by some mad warmongering Russian Hitler. Great
100,000-200,000 Russian men have died, defeat is now unthinkable. It’s like us abandoning HS2. Sunk Cost
False analogy. If we "abandon" HS2 now we'll just have to build it in 10 or 20 years. Hopefully in 10 or 20 years Russia will have a leader that doesn't want to repeat Putin's errors.
I’m looking ahead ten years max. Beyond that we will all be run by GPTMuskBot 892 anyway
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
He was showing great talent in the Blast before that though part of the reason he didn't draw much excitement until later was his breakthrough was in 2020.
And we would still be largely unaware of his talent as a Test batsmen if Bairstow were better at golf.
A year ago I would have said 'How the hell do you break your leg playing golf', but as a year ago I managed to break both legs, one spectacularly, while just walking, I'm now surprised he didn't manage both arms as well.
How did you manage it, as a matter of interest ? Something I’d like to avoid, if at all possible.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one or a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
But I'll check again - and indeed I just missed something: there is a public hustings being televised especially to keep you happy and contented, and @MoonRabbit can tell us all about their performance in the fashion furlongs.
"TV will broadcast the debate, which will be hosted by political editor Colin Mackay.
It is scheduled to air at 9pm on Tuesday, March 7 and will see Ash Regan, Kate Forbes and Humza Yousaf face off as they make their cases to party members."
One step closer to escape from this hostage situation. The rolling strikes make it impossible for those of us reliant on trains to plan anything more than two weeks in advance. The sooner they're all over, the better.
Was a new deal offered recently? I don't remember reading anything saying so.
It is the same deal the RMT rejected without balloting their members which says it all about the RMT leadership
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
No, I don't agree.
I suspect Russia will implode into a kind of civil war in which competing mafias scramble for control of key resources. Nobody will really want the nukes - too expensive and difficult to manage - although they may be used in strategic bargaining.
Russia, as we have known it for a thousand years, will no more exist than Yugoslavia does today.
This is the stupidest thing you have ever written on PB. I guess a weird form of “congrats” is in order
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
It is a de facto FM election and hiding away from the public is a terrible look if it happened
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
"Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder."
I'm far from convinced that's the case. Look at the Second World War: Germany had over 700,000 men in the Caucus in January 1943; the Soviets had a million. And that was just one front for both. The Ukraine war might be the largest land war we've seen for some years, but it's tiny compared to past wars.
Russia is, and wants to remain, a modern society. The modern world requires so many more skilled people than war did 80 years ago: there are loads of jobs that simply did not exist, but are critical to society and to war. We can't just send the Bevan Boys in to perform them as it takes years to learn the skills.
Then there are the demographic issues mentioned below.
The same also applies to Ukraine, as it happens.
It’s not ‘tiny’ - there are still very large numbers involved, even if it’s not quite WWII scale. And it’s cannons rather than cannon fodder that they’re likely to run short of.
Btw, the article I posted upthread is essential reading for anyone commenting on the conflict. Gives an almost unprecedented (I think) window into US government decision making so close to the actual events.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Technically it isn't the election of the next First Minister; in practice, of course, it is. The Greens will doubtless be mightily pissed off when the Scottish Government sullenly admits defeat over gender recognition rather than attempting UDI, but fundamentally they're still sock puppets and aren't going to switch sides and put Labour into bat in the trial of a thousand years.
If there's no TV debate (as there was with the Truss-Sunak contest) then it will simply lead to questions as to why the candidates are frit.
One step closer to escape from this hostage situation. The rolling strikes make it impossible for those of us reliant on trains to plan anything more than two weeks in advance. The sooner they're all over, the better.
Was a new deal offered recently? I don't remember reading anything saying so.
No - it's 5% for 22/23 and 4% for 23/24 - the same deal as the TSSA accepted from Network Rail in December.
So TSSA has now agreed deals with both Network Rail and the train companies.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
It is a de facto FM election and hiding away from the public is a terrible look if it happened
Look at the edited version of my post, checked specially for you.
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
He was showing great talent in the Blast before that though part of the reason he didn't draw much excitement until later was his breakthrough was in 2020.
And we would still be largely unaware of his talent as a Test batsmen if Bairstow were better at golf.
A year ago I would have said 'How the hell do you break your leg playing golf', but as a year ago I managed to break both legs, one spectacularly, while just walking, I'm now surprised he didn't manage both arms as well.
One day I expect I will learn how you incur such an injury but for the moment I'm happy just to laugh and smile at the fortuitous opportunity for the talented young Brook.
The question is what happens when Bairstow returns? You cannot drop HB. Foakes is the obvious candidate but he's a better keeper than JB and he's done well enough with the bat to make it difficult to drop him too. What's more the England batters, al six of them, look so strong you hardly need a seventh.
Personally I'd make Bairstow wait until someone loses form. He doesn't obviously improve the team.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Technically it isn't the election of the next First Minister; in practice, of course, it is. The Greens will doubtless be mightily pissed off when the Scottish Government sullenly admits defeat over gender recognition rather than attempting UDI, but fundamentally they're still sock puppets and aren't going to switch sides and put Labour into bat in the trial of a thousand years.
If there's no TV debate (as there was with the Truss-Sunak contest) then it will simply lead to questions as to why the candidates are frit.
I note Disney and Puffin seem to have come to similar conclusions for old content that contravenes the woke laws.
What do you mean? Not seen anything about Puffin.
Unless they've changed recently, Disney's solution is quite smart. They have on Disney+ the full, unedited versions of the movies as they were released - but put up a disclaimer before it starts saying that it was made in a different era to different standards and some may now find offensive, or something along those lines.
Unless you're looking for offence one way or another, that seems like a sensible compromise. Don't compromise the integrity of the art, and if you're offended by a disclaimer you're just as sensitive as the worst of the woke.
If Puffin do the same, put a new page at the start with a disclaimer but leave the text of the book unaltered, that seems logical.
Seems resonable to me, Bart. As long as they don't start fiddling with the text.
By the way, I'm currently reading and enjoying The Person Of Color Of The Narcissus. Highly recommended.
Though there's a time and a place for fiddling with the text. I have a book I've not read yet but am meaning to get around to: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. It is a truth universally acknowledged that zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.
That was actually Jane Austen's original first line, but her editor changed it.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
It is a de facto FM election and hiding away from the public is a terrible look if it happened
Look at the edited version of my post, checked specially for you.
Sorry - I did not see your edited post and very pleased it will be televised
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
It is a de facto FM election and hiding away from the public is a terrible look if it happened
Look at the edited version of my post, checked specially for you.
Sorry - I did not see your edited post and very pleased it will be televised
Thank you
My pleasure - sorry to be a bit slow, I was fdigging around a bit.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
Neitdher of those equations follows. In this particular case the first, yes, BUT there is still enough uncertainty for the second not to be a valid conclusion. And they *must* have a vote, rather than daring the opposition to pass a motion.
Edit: re first equation, it is not actually legally necessary for the SNP leader to be a MP or MSP.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
"Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder."
I'm far from convinced that's the case. Look at the Second World War: Germany had over 700,000 men in the Caucus in January 1943; the Soviets had a million. And that was just one front for both. The Ukraine war might be the largest land war we've seen for some years, but it's tiny compared to past wars.
Russia is, and wants to remain, a modern society. The modern world requires so many more skilled people than war did 80 years ago: there are loads of jobs that simply did not exist, but are critical to society and to war. We can't just send the Bevan Boys in to perform them as it takes years to learn the skills.
Then there are the demographic issues mentioned below.
The same also applies to Ukraine, as it happens.
Glorious heroism versus shrapnel* has been sold as a war winner many times. It hasn't actually worked yet.
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
He was showing great talent in the Blast before that though part of the reason he didn't draw much excitement until later was his breakthrough was in 2020.
And we would still be largely unaware of his talent as a Test batsmen if Bairstow were better at golf.
A year ago I would have said 'How the hell do you break your leg playing golf', but as a year ago I managed to break both legs, one spectacularly, while just walking, I'm now surprised he didn't manage both arms as well.
How did you manage it, as a matter of interest ? Something I’d like to avoid, if at all possible.
Just went over on my ankle. Not much you can do to avoid it I'm guessing. Not an unknown combination of breaks either apparently. The leverage snapped the tibia at the knee and ankle and the Fibula half way down. I broke one of the bones in my other foot. The one the footballers always break, so trivial. The ligaments went completely between the tibia and fibula hence the fibula breaking as well. The tibia had to be screwed onto the fibula to bring it back into position and the bottom of the tibia had to be screwed back on. The other 3 breaks were left to heal by themselves in the cast.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
Neitdher of those equations follows. In this particular case the first, yes, BUT there is still enough uncertainty for the second not to be a valid conclusion. And they *must* have a vote, rather than daring the opposition to pass a motion.
So what odds are you offering that the winner of the membership vote either won’t be the candidate for FM, or won’t win the vote for FM? I suspect both are exceedingly long.
I note Disney and Puffin seem to have come to similar conclusions for old content that contravenes the woke laws.
What do you mean? Not seen anything about Puffin.
Unless they've changed recently, Disney's solution is quite smart. They have on Disney+ the full, unedited versions of the movies as they were released - but put up a disclaimer before it starts saying that it was made in a different era to different standards and some may now find offensive, or something along those lines.
Unless you're looking for offence one way or another, that seems like a sensible compromise. Don't compromise the integrity of the art, and if you're offended by a disclaimer you're just as sensitive as the worst of the woke.
If Puffin do the same, put a new page at the start with a disclaimer but leave the text of the book unaltered, that seems logical.
Seems resonable to me, Bart. As long as they don't start fiddling with the text.
By the way, I'm currently reading and enjoying The Person Of Color Of The Narcissus. Highly recommended.
Though there's a time and a place for fiddling with the text. I have a book I've not read yet but am meaning to get around to: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. It is a truth universally acknowledged that zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.
That was actually Jane Austen's original first line, but her editor changed it.
Many years ago, on soc.history.what-if, someone posted a marvellous mashup of Pride and Prejudice with the Terminator. Mr Terminus goes down a treat in Georgian society, despite being clockwork.....
I'm wondering whether this is becoming a Forbes vs Regan battle.
Yousaf as the SNP establishment candidate and supporter of GRR is going to backfire bigly.
The bulk of the SNP parliamentary bloc backed GRR. Are they going to be happy performing a 180-degree about turn and saying "well, actually, we don't believe in this after all and transwomen aren't women really"? More to the point, and I don't know the answer to the following question but perhaps someone better informed can offer some insight, is the party membership itself to the left of public opinion on the trans mudslinging debate (and might therefore be expected to be suspicious of both the female candidates,) or do they care about nothing except trying to nudge the dial of popular opinion a degree or two closer to independence? If they really are totally monomaniacal then they'd presumably be quite happy to shit on Stonewall in order to win over a few thousand extra floating voters, and Regan's position strengthens accordingly?
How did the SNP end up with just these 3 candidates ?
It really is a poor choice for their membership to chose from and Labour must think Christmas has come early .
The choice being Mr Angry , Miss Bible Basher and Miss Non-entity .
We spend so much time focussing on the dearth of talent in the upper echelons of the Tory Party that we (especially the large majority of us not resident in Scotland) may simply have failed to notice that the SNP suffers from a similar vacuum?
Has Mr Angry said anything convincing in support of same-sex marriage (and to rebuff the rumours surrounding his convenient-looking absence from the final parliamentary vote on the matter?) If he does, he wins. Miss Bible Basher is already disqualified by her social conservatism and Miss Non-Entity will probably come a cropper likewise for being too chummy (in the view of most of the selectorate, at any rate,) with TERFs.
Mrs Bible Basher, please. And I think she can win. Polling of 2021 SNP voters suggests she's their choice, plus she's generally regarded as competent. The members are even more likely than 2021 voters to prioritise independence above social issues, and they are the electorate. If the members think Forbes will be the best for independence then I suspect they will vote for her.
Was this poll conducted before or after said voters were forced to confront her religious views? The obvious risk for all those "independence matters and nothing else" members is that those views would dog her throughout her leadership and sap away at it in the manner of a female Tim Farron. Quite apart from anything else I'm sure we haven't heard the full extent of her interesting philosophical positions, and they are almost bound to keep coming up if she wins. It helps the desperate to kill the Union membership not a jot if the public discourse is less about the boundless evils of Westminster, and more about whether or not there were dinosaurs in the Garden of Eden.
Interesting question on the field work, the answer is I'm not sure. Another interesting factor is that the vote is STV, so transfer friendliness could be important. Regan --> Forbes seems likely in the first instance but not sure about others.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
It was commented this morning that if Kate Forbes wins upto 6 SNP mps would vote for Sarwar would you believe
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
And if it is Forbes who wins the SNP membership vote she will likely end up FM of Scotland without most MSPs supporting her. Exactly the same problem Truss had when Tory members but not most MPs elected her UK PM
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
No, I don't agree.
I suspect Russia will implode into a kind of civil war in which competing mafias scramble for control of key resources. Nobody will really want the nukes - too expensive and difficult to manage - although they may be used in strategic bargaining.
Russia, as we have known it for a thousand years, will no more exist than Yugoslavia does today.
This is the stupidest thing you have ever written on PB. I guess a weird form of “congrats” is in order
Wow! That's a pretty high bar, Leon.
It's taken many years of practice but well worth it.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
It is a de facto FM election and hiding away from the public is a terrible look if it happened
Look at the edited version of my post, checked specially for you.
Sorry - I did not see your edited post and very pleased it will be televised
Thank you
My pleasure - sorry to be a bit slow, I was fdigging around a bit.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
Neitdher of those equations follows. In this particular case the first, yes, BUT there is still enough uncertainty for the second not to be a valid conclusion. And they *must* have a vote, rather than daring the opposition to pass a motion.
So what odds are you offering that the winner of the membership vote either won’t be the candidate for FM, or won’t win the vote for FM? I suspect both are exceedingly long.
On the former, sure, but only in this case because all are MSPs. And on the latter. I rest my case re the numbers.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
No, I don't agree.
I suspect Russia will implode into a kind of civil war in which competing mafias scramble for control of key resources. Nobody will really want the nukes - too expensive and difficult to manage - although they may be used in strategic bargaining.
Russia, as we have known it for a thousand years, will no more exist than Yugoslavia does today.
This is the stupidest thing you have ever written on PB. I guess a weird form of “congrats” is in order
Why? I'm not saying it will happen, but it isn't an unreasonable scenario @Peter_the_Punter puts forward and we do have the Yugoslavia example of a breakup which isn't too dissimilar and with regard to the nukes some/most, if not all, countries that fell out of the USSR gave them up so why is what he suggests silly?
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
And if it is Forbes who wins the SNP membership vote she will likely end up FM of Scotland without most MSPs supporting her. Exactly the same problem Truss had when Tory members but not most MPs elected her UK PM
Yes, Forbes is permanently crippled, politically
She would be a hugely divisive figure, if she becomes FM
Yousaf is an inept buffoon
Ash Regan seems both VALUE and sensible, if you’re a punter or a Nit
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
I note Disney and Puffin seem to have come to similar conclusions for old content that contravenes the woke laws.
What do you mean? Not seen anything about Puffin.
Unless they've changed recently, Disney's solution is quite smart. They have on Disney+ the full, unedited versions of the movies as they were released - but put up a disclaimer before it starts saying that it was made in a different era to different standards and some may now find offensive, or something along those lines.
Unless you're looking for offence one way or another, that seems like a sensible compromise. Don't compromise the integrity of the art, and if you're offended by a disclaimer you're just as sensitive as the worst of the woke.
If Puffin do the same, put a new page at the start with a disclaimer but leave the text of the book unaltered, that seems logical.
Seems resonable to me, Bart. As long as they don't start fiddling with the text.
By the way, I'm currently reading and enjoying The Person Of Color Of The Narcissus. Highly recommended.
Though there's a time and a place for fiddling with the text. I have a book I've not read yet but am meaning to get around to: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. It is a truth universally acknowledged that zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains.
That was actually Jane Austen's original first line, but her editor changed it.
The movie of that graphic novel was pretty poor, despite the eye candy.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
And if it is Forbes who wins the SNP membership vote she will likely end up FM of Scotland without most MSPs supporting her. Exactly the same problem Truss had when Tory members but not most MPs elected her UK PM
How can she end up as FM without the support of most MSPs?
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Pretty much. Apart from anything else, Russia has an almost limitless supply of cannon fodder.
It all ends with partition along a line of control as per Kashmir, with neither side recognising the territory held by the other de jure, but an accommodation being reached de facto. The 80% of Ukraine that remains unoccupied will then be pumped so full of cash and weapons that the cost of trying to resume the war of conquest at some point in the future will be too steep for Putin or his successors to stomach.
This state having been reached, the key challenge will then be to maintain a degree of unity with respect to the ostracism of Russia. Fundamentally, this is a fascist state with a fascist leadership and an overwhelmingly fascist-sympathising population: the existence of a handful of doomed internal dissidents and Pussy Riot does nothing to alter the fact that most Russians back both Putin and his imperial ambitions to the hilt. There will have to be a lot of determined diplomacy to prevent potential backsliders like Italy and Germany from trying to resume antebellum positions on trade and appeasement.
No, I don't agree.
I suspect Russia will implode into a kind of civil war in which competing mafias scramble for control of key resources. Nobody will really want the nukes - too expensive and difficult to manage - although they may be used in strategic bargaining.
Russia, as we have known it for a thousand years, will no more exist than Yugoslavia does today.
This is the stupidest thing you have ever written on PB. I guess a weird form of “congrats” is in order
Wow! That's a pretty high bar, Leon.
It's taken many years of practice but well worth it.
Lol
Have you traveled widely in Russia? I have. Russian identity is REALLY strong throughout 90% of the country. It is quite strong over the border in neighboring countries like Belarus (and bits of Ukraine)
It is not “Yugoslavia”. It is rather more like Japan or England. Ancient and solid with tiny peripheral bits feeling a little less sure (Okinawa, Cornwall). It’s not going to break up into Muscovy and Yakutia any more than England will break up into Londinium and Northumbria
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
And if it is Forbes who wins the SNP membership vote she will likely end up FM of Scotland without most MSPs supporting her. Exactly the same problem Truss had when Tory members but not most MPs elected her UK PM
How can she end up as FM without the support of most MSPs?
I think his first impressive performances were in the first season of the Hundred. Would be funny if that much-maligned competition could be given partial credit for the emergence of a great English Test batter.
Might be great to watch live at the ground but the tv view is execrable.
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
And if it is Forbes who wins the SNP membership vote she will likely end up FM of Scotland without most MSPs supporting her. Exactly the same problem Truss had when Tory members but not most MPs elected her UK PM
How can she end up as FM without the support of most MSPs?
On the face of it, I would go for Ashten. She seems moderate and centre-left, and while I take @Theuniondivvie 's point about her private schooling her children, I am happy to vote for the many Labour MPs who do likewise. So not a dealbreaker for me.
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Popped in quickly. Just learnt that there will be members' hustings, but all members only. AIUI this is separate from the broadcasters' ones (if any).
Televised ?
Members only, I did say: but, since you ask, and since the point is worth clarifying, even the online one is members' only. Ms Regan has agreed to a proposed broadcast hustings but I'm not sure what the state of play of the other two is.
Thanks but surely it is inconceivable that hustings will not be televised
This *is* a membership election, not an election for FM or a national one ór a Westminster election. The election for FM will be televised like any vote in the Holyrood Parliament.
Much like the recent Tory leadership election then? It was not guaranteed the new Tory leader would be PM, just extremely likely.
Not true. A vote for [edit, sorry] FM is *obligatory*. And have a look at the numbers.
But the candidate that wins the membership vote is going to be the candidate for FM, who will then go on to win that vote.
And if it is Forbes who wins the SNP membership vote she will likely end up FM of Scotland without most MSPs supporting her. Exactly the same problem Truss had when Tory members but not most MPs elected her UK PM
How can she end up as FM without the support of most MSPs?
She cannot
Can. See my post.
Edit: it depnds how mau abstain, and how many vote against. See my post, as I said, for an example.
The question is whether any group or groups are (a) big enough and (b) wanting to force an election by deadlocking the FM election.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
Where do you stand on Crimea.
The failure to contest its illegal seizure is probably the one thing most responsible for encouraging Putin to invade the rest of Ukraine.
I’d like it to be true, but I don’t see how Russia loses this “outright”
Putin has successfully made the war existential. Therefore Russian defeat in Ukraine is the conquest of Russia. That cannot happen because Russian is a great power WITH NUKES. Even if Putin is toppled no replacement will be allowed to negotiate “surrender”
This is Korean War 2.0. Quagmire and Armistice beckons, eventually
Yes, I think you are right. Especially if China starts to arm Russia.
He's wrong; not in intention (we don't want another war in twenty years), but in perspective.
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
Where do you stand on Crimea.
Ukrainian. Where do you stand on it?
So to be returned to Ukraine in this conflict?
Now that Putin has terminated the Kharkiv Pact leasing the military facilities, it is a possibility.
Comments
Regan presents well and her background in marketing could help her make the case for independence.
That all said, she is something of a (flame-haired) dark horse, so like many other PBers I don't know a great deal about her.
Plus, demography is not on Russia's side. It just lost a load of its fighting age men, the birth rate is falling and the population is going to carry on shrinking.
I guess it's similar to Alex Hales in a way, that was what got him back in the England line-up, although is he out again? Dude seems to get himself into trouble all the time
If Johnson has bought the Manor, it's more likely he would go a couple of miles down the road to try his luck in his old Henley seat, where the current MP could be persuadable to step aside.
Seems the government have instructed all its mps to be in the HOC for a three line whip on Monday
NIP ?
Plus good to see one of the rail unions accept the pay deal notwithstanding it is the same one the RMT have rejected without balloting all their members
Also just watched a clip on Sky with Ash Regan
Oh dear
Wantage is a LD stretch target. Witney is more challenging as the non-Tory vote is likely to continue to split between Labour and the LDs. The new Bicester & Woodstock seat is affluent Oxford commuter belt and as such very fertile territory for the LDs. Henley could in theory be a LD gain but I think it's unlikely.
If he goes for an Oxfordshire seat I expect it to be Henley. He has the local connection, John Howell hasn't said he's standing again, and Howell isn't much liked at any rate.
TSSA accept deal
The Cold War happened for a reason. A hot war meant total annihilation for everyone, so an armed, nasty but essentially peaceful stand off was better. Ukraine will be divided between West and East as Europe was divided post 1945 (and Korea)
Even if Putin is toppled, it is now incredibly unlikely he will be toppled by a peacenik pro-Western successor happy to give up Crimea. The peacenik would then be toppled in turn by some mad warmongering Russian Hitler. Great
100,000-200,000 Russian men have died, defeat is now unthinkable. It’s like us abandoning HS2. Sunk Cost
The Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association (TSSA) said its 3,000 members voted overwhelmingly in favour of deals which include a two-year pay rise worth 9%.
I'm far from convinced that's the case. Look at the Second World War: Germany had over 700,000 men in the Caucus in January 1943; the Soviets had a million. And that was just one front for both. The Ukraine war might be the largest land war we've seen for some years, but it's tiny compared to past wars.
Russia is, and wants to remain, a modern society. The modern world requires so many more skilled people than war did 80 years ago: there are loads of jobs that simply did not exist, but are critical to society and to war. We can't just send the Bevan Boys in to perform them as it takes years to learn the skills.
Then there are the demographic issues mentioned below.
The same also applies to Ukraine, as it happens.
I suspect Russia will implode into a kind of civil war in which competing mafias scramble for control of key resources. Nobody will really want the nukes - too expensive and difficult to manage - although they may be used in strategic bargaining.
Russia, as we have known it for a thousand years, will no more exist than Yugoslavia does today.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23344976.ash-regan-not-afraid-scottish-greens-leaving-bute-house-deal/?ref=ebbn
Something I’d like to avoid, if at all possible.
But I'll check again - and indeed I just missed something: there is a public hustings being televised especially to keep you happy and contented, and @MoonRabbit can tell us all about their performance in the fashion furlongs.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23345071.stv-first-tv-debate-confirmed-snp-leadership-race/
"TV will broadcast the debate, which will be hosted by political editor Colin Mackay.
It is scheduled to air at 9pm on Tuesday, March 7 and will see Ash Regan, Kate Forbes and Humza Yousaf face off as they make their cases to party members."
Toxic masculinity.
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/who-is-ash-regan-snp-leadership-candidate-hoping-to-replace-nicola-sturgeon-in-election-4039785
The view of our chief bible basher. He’s right.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/russia-justin-welby-ukraine-germany-archbishop-b1062755.html
Turnips sold out.
And it’s cannons rather than cannon fodder that they’re likely to run short of.
Btw, the article I posted upthread is essential reading for anyone commenting on the conflict. Gives an almost unprecedented (I think) window into US government decision making so close to the actual events.
It’s a long read, but quite remarkable.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/24/russia-ukraine-war-oral-history-00083757
I'm wondering whether this is becoming a Forbes vs Regan battle.
Yousaf as the SNP establishment candidate and supporter of GRR is going to backfire bigly.
If there's no TV debate (as there was with the Truss-Sunak contest) then it will simply lead to questions as to why the candidates are frit.
So TSSA has now agreed deals with both Network Rail and the train companies.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64756141
The question is what happens when Bairstow returns? You cannot drop HB. Foakes is the obvious candidate but he's a better keeper than JB and he's done well enough with the bat to make it difficult to drop him too. What's more the England batters, al six of them, look so strong you hardly need a seventh.
Personally I'd make Bairstow wait until someone loses form. He doesn't obviously improve the team.
Maybe he can work on his golf?
It's a film!!
We need a peace that deters Russia and other aggressor states in the future. We need to make this war a salutatory lesson that it's better to work together than to wage war. We need to get that peace, and once we've got it, then we can look at how to encourage Russia not to so anything this tragically dumb again.
But we need that peace first.
Welby's view goes dangerously near the "Let Russia get some territory" rubbish that will just encourage them to go again in a few years.
Thank you
Edit: re first equation, it is not actually legally necessary for the SNP leader to be a MP or MSP.
Perhaps the Russian army needs Red Trousers?
*Shout out to Col. Shrapnel - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Shrapnel
All good now.
He was around 1.7 late last night.
It's taken many years of practice but well worth it.
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1629138329156431872?s=20
Could be a proper schism this.
https://twitter.com/MhairiBlack/status/1629125518007189504?t=mlIfWF4NigoKdZ2Fsh8Qpg&s=19
She would be a hugely divisive figure, if she becomes FM
Yousaf is an inept buffoon
Ash Regan seems both VALUE and sensible, if you’re a punter or a Nit
Mrs BJ was the gardener before she became paraplegic in 2016.
Since then its tubs only
Now there is a woman I would vote for
Perhaps I should vote SNP!!
Have you traveled widely in Russia? I have. Russian identity is REALLY strong throughout 90% of the country. It is quite strong over the border in neighboring countries like Belarus (and bits of Ukraine)
It is not “Yugoslavia”. It is rather more like Japan or England. Ancient and solid with tiny peripheral bits feeling a little less sure (Okinawa, Cornwall). It’s not going to break up into Muscovy and Yakutia any more than England will break up into Londinium and Northumbria
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clapshot
Definitely something that might jus\t redeem the Therese Coffey Brexit Swede and Turnip Cuisine, sorry Cookery, Book.
Edit: it depnds how mau abstain, and how many vote against. See my post, as I said, for an example.
The question is whether any group or groups are (a) big enough and (b) wanting to force an election by deadlocking the FM election.