Ukraine having another good day in Bakhmut. LOL at the Russians trying to sell a withdrawal from large parts of the town as a positive move.
Trump was asked 3 times this week in the debate if he wanted a ukraine victory. He didnt answer and merely said he wanted the fighting to stop. Clearly i think we can conclude Trump favours a peace deal on Russias terms.
Just as well the Russian army are going to have their arses kicked back to Russia before the US election then.
Not that the US president actually has the power to end the war, and that the military industrial complex funding his party wouldn’t want to see anything but a total Russian annihilation.
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
Ukraine having another good day in Bakhmut. LOL at the Russians trying to sell a withdrawal from large parts of the town as a positive move.
Trump was asked 3 times this week in the debate if he wanted a ukraine victory. He didnt answer and merely said he wanted the fighting to stop. Clearly i think we can conclude Trump favours a peace deal on Russias terms.
Yes, that is a very reasonable conclusion as that would be the only way for a swift peace deal.
What worries me is not that he thinks that but that clearly the base like that even if Senate Republicans do not.
In the absence of clear ground data i think we can tell how the war is going by looking at the state of the leaders. Zelensky looks in an awful state now depressed and ill looking.
With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.
For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.
On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.
It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.
I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.
I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses
The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
If a pledge merely implies something that implication can safely be ignored as meaningless.
A direct pledge will often fail but at least usually shows intent.
Housebuilding is one of very few levers that Starmer has to deliver two of his pledges. Which is why I expect him to use it.
A reduction in housing costs would be very noticeable - for most it is by far their biggest item of expenditure.
It will take 2 terms to get it rolling and the prices to start to turn.
The one thing not mentioned is minimum room size. There’s good evidence that people living in rabbit hutches has some bad effects on mental health.
As for the NIMBYS - I’d suggest embracing such plans and trying to make the best of them. Or look forward to the FuckTheGreenBelt Party winning an election.
The important and missing piece of data is how did the 2019 Con 'don't knows' vote prior to 2019, and did they vote at all. That would give an indication of where they may go. I agree with David Herdson- the poll lead is genuine. You can see the swing on the doorstep. If anything, the local elections did not show the true extent. Last year Labour overwhelmingly won in London. Paper candidates won unexpectedly. This year, there was a similar swing against the Tories. The headline results don't show wards and councillors won without knocking on a single door, again with paper candidates winning.
Ukraine needs to call off this catastrophic "counter-attack". Too many people are dying for absolutely nothing. There's no Bakhmut left to take back, it's gone. Flattened. The underground system is probably booby-trapped. You're falling for the most obvious trap in history.
With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.
For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.
On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.
It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.
I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.
I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses
The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
If a pledge merely implies something that implication can safely be ignored as meaningless.
A direct pledge will often fail but at least usually shows intent.
Housebuilding is one of very few levers that Starmer has to deliver two of his pledges. Which is why I expect him to use it.
A reduction in housing costs would be very noticeable - for most it is by far their biggest item of expenditure.
It will take 2 terms to get it rolling and the prices to start to turn.
The one thing not mentioned is minimum room size. There’s good evidence that people living in rabbit hutches has some bad effects on mental health.
As for the NIMBYS - I’d suggest embracing such plans and trying to make the best of them. Or look forward to the FuckTheGreenBelt Party winning an election.
Green belt is another weird one. I am conceptually in favour but really dont see a problem taking 1% out over 50 years when population is growing quickly. It doesn't need to be a free for all, but neither does it need to be a freeze of some arbitrary designations many years ago.
This will upset people but I’ll explain what’s happening in Bakhmut quite simply: It’s part of the special mauling operation. Russia wants both arms and personnel fed into a killing field. It knows Ukraine will be forced off its path should it lose Bakhmut. So it “gives” a little
Ukraine needs to call off this catastrophic "counter-attack". Too many people are dying for absolutely nothing. There's no Bakhmut left to take back, it's gone. Flattened. The underground system is probably booby-trapped. You're falling for the most obvious trap in history.
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
How did you conclude that from my post mocking extremist cartoons?
And no one is a force for pure good, so that would be an idiotic test designed to allow awful people to go "See, we are no different to that other person who is not percect". The very fact you've assumed I think Gates is pure good because I mocked a cartoon demonstrates the silliness of that.
The British magazine Spectator discusses why the economic war against Russia failed. The publication writes that the confrontation with the Russian Federation is not only on the military, but also on the economic front, and "few people in the West realize how bad things are in this aspect of the war." One reason is "while the West was interested in economic warfare, the rest of the world didn't want it."
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
Ukraine needs to call off this catastrophic "counter-attack". Too many people are dying for absolutely nothing. There's no Bakhmut left to take back, it's gone. Flattened. The underground system is probably booby-trapped. You're falling for the most obvious trap in history.
Stuart in Romford - those housing plans look a bit of a dog's dinner. How to square housebuilding targets with giving power to local authorities (who will surely do what they can not to build them?) I'm not sure I actually like the idea of home ownership targets either. The government should be focused on two things. Firstly making sure there are enough houses and that they are good quality - an anti poverty strategy is worthless without such a commitment. Secondly maintaining stability in the housing market. It is absurd that we have an economic policy with a near obsessive focus on price stability (or we're supposed to anyway) but the biggest cost in people's lives inextricably linked to the stability of the whole financial system isn't really taken seriously. The attitude that owning your own home is the only thing that matters and the debt involved largely unimportant needs to end.
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
Ill go for 1133 and 11 posts.
Mods on standby?
Ah! Lion king. An early arrival has taken us by surprise!
Why Ukraine is not doing so well with the offensive? Because as soon as Ukraine begins to accumulate its troops and weapons in certain places, Russia immediately launches missile strikes on these clusters. That's how it goes, everybody knows
Ukraine having another good day in Bakhmut. LOL at the Russians trying to sell a withdrawal from large parts of the town as a positive move.
Trump was asked 3 times this week in the debate if he wanted a ukraine victory. He didnt answer and merely said he wanted the fighting to stop. Clearly i think we can conclude Trump favours a peace deal on Russias terms.
Just as well the Russian army are going to have their arses kicked back to Russia before the US election then.
Not that the US president actually has the power to end the war, and that the military industrial complex funding his party wouldn’t want to see anything but a total Russian annihilation.
The military industrial complex wouldn't want total Russian annihilation; that would mean no need for weapons. They would want continued conflict along the current lines.
Why Ukraine is not doing so well with the offensive? Because as soon as Ukraine begins to accumulate its troops and weapons in certain places, Russia immediately launches missile strikes on these clusters. That's how it goes, everybody knows
Ukraine needs to call off this catastrophic "counter-attack". Too many people are dying for absolutely nothing. There's no Bakhmut left to take back, it's gone. Flattened. The underground system is probably booby-trapped. You're falling for the most obvious trap in history.
But just for fun - yes, traps are possible. But do you remember a lot Russian leaning posts online saying the retreats around Kharkiv and Kherson were also traps?
Didnt work out that way.
Got to love the classics though - Bakhmut has been destroyed, by the Russians, so Ukraine should not bother trying to retake it.
Just maybe they would like to prevent other Bakhmuts in future?
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.
Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
I should have added, there's a chart I find interesting in the tweet below that plots local NEV share against the contemporary GE VI polling. Last week's election results implied polling of almost exactly where it in fact was (it's maybe ticked up a couple of points since).
In other words, that ~15% Lab lead is real and rooted in hard votes.
Now, as we've been told many times, polls are a snapshot not a prediction. Just because Labour is mid-teens up now it doesn't mean they will be come the election (indeed, it doesn't even mean they would be mid-teens up if there was a GE tomorrow; polls have been known to be wrong). A lot can happen in 12-18 months. But that's a different point - whether or not Labour will retain the landslide-delivering lead they have now isn't the issue. The issue is whether they currently have one. And they do.
Crucial point this. The locals point to a solid double digit Labour lead on a GE basis. For me the most likely outcome is a modest Labour majority and with more chance of a big one than none at all. If I had to offer a tradeable spread on their seats (which thank god I don't) I'd put up something like 345/355.
Shocking and shameful levels of voter suppression at the locals are now emerging. Any government genuinely concerned about democracy would never have introduced the voter ID laws.
Ukraine having another good day in Bakhmut. LOL at the Russians trying to sell a withdrawal from large parts of the town as a positive move.
Trump was asked 3 times this week in the debate if he wanted a ukraine victory. He didnt answer and merely said he wanted the fighting to stop. Clearly i think we can conclude Trump favours a peace deal on Russias terms.
The message will be filtering from the Kremlin right down to the frontline.
"Hold on, hold on, because soon He is coming and victory will be ours"
Shocking and shameful levels of voter suppression at the locals are now emerging. Any government genuinely concerned about democracy would never have introduced the voter ID laws.
Variant, they may or may not have introduced voter ID laws, many places have them, but they wouldn't have introduced these ones which, at best, were poorly conceived and executed. At worst, well, that's been gone into plenty.
Have spent the morning reading Christopher Hitchens' memoir Hitch '22. Whilst he's always struck me as an interesting raconteur and columnist I've never fully admired him in the way his fans do. I've got to admit having read the first few chapters on each of his parents as well as a prologue portending his likely death it is gripping stuff. His parents met in the Navy during the war and they seem a bit of an odd couple. Father gets decommissioned and seems embittered at being left behind by johnny come latelies who did nothing during the war. He bristles as the Empire is handed over to some chancers who disregard the law and dislikes the spoiling of the English landscape with new roads and railways. I chortled at the remark he made late in life that if the Channel tunnel gets built he'll never vote Conservative again. By contrast his mother goes all new age in the 60s, various failed attempts at opening a dress shop and eventually falls for another man. She and her 'lover' die in a suicide pact in a Greek hotel.
I've often wondered whether the much maligned Hitchens minor, Peter, puts on something of an act but this has made me realise that he isn't simply the contrarian to the illustrious Christopher (c/f kinabalu) but rather where as Christopher is his mother's son, Peter is his father's. You might never be able to explain everything but the traditionalism, the sympathy with Russian imperial loss, the rejection of market conservatism and detestation of the 60s he expresses make a lot of sense now.
Have spent the morning reading Christopher Hitchens' memoir Hitch '22. Whilst he's always struck me as an interesting raconteur and columnist I've never fully admired him in the way his fans do. I've got to admit having read the first few chapters on each of his parents as well as a prologue portending his likely death it is gripping stuff. His parents met in the Navy during the war and they seem a bit of an odd couple. Father gets decommissioned and seems embittered at being left behind by johnny come latelies who did nothing during the war. He bristles as the Empire is handed over to some chancers who disregard the law and dislikes the spoiling of the English landscape with new roads and railways. I chortled at the remark he made late in life that if the Channel tunnel gets built he'll never vote Conservative again. By contrast his mother goes all new age in the 60s, various failed attempts at opening a dress shop and eventually falls for another man. She and her 'lover' die in a suicide pact in a Greek hotel.
I've often wondered whether the much maligned Hitchens minor, Peter, puts on something of an act but this has made me realise that he isn't simply the contrarian to the illustrious Christopher (c/f kinabalu) but rather where as Christopher is his mother's son, Peter is his father's. You might never be able to explain everything but the traditionalism, the sympathy with Russian imperial loss, the rejection of market conservatism and detestation of the 60s he expresses make a lot of sense now.
My take has always been both Christopher and Peter are a pair of odd balls with far too much to say for themselves...
Edit: Columnist/commentators do rub me up the wrong way generally though...
Shocking and shameful levels of voter suppression at the locals are now emerging. Any government genuinely concerned about democracy would never have introduced the voter ID laws.
I am not convinced by this overwhelming wave of hatred that @Heathener reports on a daily basis but there is no doubt that the local election results cut deep into the Tory muscle and bone, the fat having been cut away in the last round. These were terrible local election results by any measure and the Tories were lucky that they disappeared from the headlines so quickly thanks to the Coronation.
But anything short of panic in CCHQ would be inappropriate. They need to work hard at delivering promises over the next year (anything after that will be too late) and hope and pray that the economy comes around in time. They have the advantage of incumbency, they have a lot of public money as a result, they need to work their cotton socks off if they want to have a job in 2025. Many of them, probably at least 70, won't. And it could be a lot worse.
A Labour majority requires a bigger swing that Cameron managed in 2010. I remain to be convinced that SKS is capable of that. But its likely to be close.
Come visit the South East. The Tories even lost Chevening!
I remain of the view Labour will win somewhere between 280-320 seats. I just cannot see that Labour gets there in one go.
What is likely I think, is that in the election after Labour wins and wins big, as it seems like the Tories are intent on doing a Corbyn Labour.
Labour were intending to do a deal with the LDs and perhaps bring in proportional representation in 1997, but because they won such a huge majority those plans had to be scrapped. In hindsight it may have been better if they hadn't won so big.
Last Thursday's QT from Bexhill reflected the same mood - despair as people have given up on the useless Tories but no love for Labour. The final question with humour asked people to pick a song title that sums up the times, and there were some on the point suggestions
Shocking and shameful levels of voter suppression at the locals are now emerging. Any government genuinely concerned about democracy would never have introduced the voter ID laws.
Variant, they may or may not have introduced voter ID laws, many places have them, but they wouldn't have introduced these ones which, at best, were poorly conceived and executed. At worst, well, that's been gone into plenty.
Yep. If it’s hundreds in Walsall and Leeds, it will be thousands in Birmingham and Leeds. Possibly even higher in London. Absolutely shameful. If it’s not deliberate, there will be an urgent, full-scale rethink. Without this, we’ll know voter suppression was the aim.
I remain of the view Labour will win somewhere between 280-320 seats. I just cannot see that Labour gets there in one go.
What is likely I think, is that in the election after Labour wins and wins big, as it seems like the Tories are intent on doing a Corbyn Labour.
Labour were intending to do a deal with the LDs and perhaps bring in proportional representation in 1997, but because they won such a huge majority those plans had to be scrapped. In hindsight it may have been better if they hadn't won so big.
Yes. And I don't think enough people in Labour have learned the lesson. The "our way or the highway" attitude keeps them out of power for long stretches.
Have spent the morning reading Christopher Hitchens' memoir Hitch '22. Whilst he's always struck me as an interesting raconteur and columnist I've never fully admired him in the way his fans do. I've got to admit having read the first few chapters on each of his parents as well as a prologue portending his likely death it is gripping stuff. His parents met in the Navy during the war and they seem a bit of an odd couple. Father gets decommissioned and seems embittered at being left behind by johnny come latelies who did nothing during the war. He bristles as the Empire is handed over to some chancers who disregard the law and dislikes the spoiling of the English landscape with new roads and railways. I chortled at the remark he made late in life that if the Channel tunnel gets built he'll never vote Conservative again. By contrast his mother goes all new age in the 60s, various failed attempts at opening a dress shop and eventually falls for another man. She and her 'lover' die in a suicide pact in a Greek hotel.
I've often wondered whether the much maligned Hitchens minor, Peter, puts on something of an act but this has made me realise that he isn't simply the contrarian to the illustrious Christopher (c/f kinabalu) but rather where as Christopher is his mother's son, Peter is his father's. You might never be able to explain everything but the traditionalism, the sympathy with Russian imperial loss, the rejection of market conservatism and detestation of the 60s he expresses make a lot of sense now.
Though Peter was a raving Trot in his youth and Christopher ended up far too chummy with Washington Neocons. They both went/are on strange journeys.
Talking of columnists/commentators with far too much to say for themselves I still often go back and have a good laugh at this masterpiece from the absurd Andrew Neil from 23rd September 2023 - singing the praises of the mini-budget.
Why anyone, anywhere, takes Neil seriously after he wrote this column is beyond me 😂
There was a good article in the Telegraph summing up the current frustrations of conservative votes:
"There was a moment, during the recording of a podcast in front of a London audience on Wednesday night, that should send a shiver down Rishi Sunak’s spine. When asked by our host, Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator and my fellow Telegraph columnist, what reason they would give for voting Conservative at the next general election, the Right-leaning crowd of around 300 could barely summon a response.
After a stony silence had descended on the room, the best answer one chap could muster was: “Because Labour would be even worse.”
I know it has long been said that elections aren’t for the Opposition to win but sitting governments to lose, but seriously? That an audience largely consisting of conservative-minded voters cannot think of a single reason for voting Tory beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s own ineptitude should be a wake up call for the Prime Minister – and yet he ploughs on, hammering one nail into the Conservatives’ coffin after another."
My view of the current polls is that I would be suspicious of any where Con+Reform<33%. I think if Reform had a better leader (perhaps Farage coming back) then we'd start to see serious movement Con>Ref and DK>Ref
Shocking and shameful levels of voter suppression at the locals are now emerging. Any government genuinely concerned about democracy would never have introduced the voter ID laws.
Variant, they may or may not have introduced voter ID laws, many places have them, but they wouldn't have introduced these ones which, at best, were poorly conceived and executed. At worst, well, that's been gone into plenty.
Yep. If it’s hundreds in Walsall and Leeds, it will be thousands in Birmingham and Leeds. Possibly even higher in London. Absolutely shameful. If it’s not deliberate, there will be an urgent, full-scale rethink. Without this, we’ll know voter suppression was the aim.
If there’s any evidence, however slight, that the turned away would have voted Conservative, then there be. If, however, the opposite applies, then there won’t be.
There was a good article in the Telegraph summing up the current frustrations of conservative votes:
"There was a moment, during the recording of a podcast in front of a London audience on Wednesday night, that should send a shiver down Rishi Sunak’s spine. When asked by our host, Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator and my fellow Telegraph columnist, what reason they would give for voting Conservative at the next general election, the Right-leaning crowd of around 300 could barely summon a response.
After a stony silence had descended on the room, the best answer one chap could muster was: “Because Labour would be even worse.”
I know it has long been said that elections aren’t for the Opposition to win but sitting governments to lose, but seriously? That an audience largely consisting of conservative-minded voters cannot think of a single reason for voting Tory beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s own ineptitude should be a wake up call for the Prime Minister – and yet he ploughs on, hammering one nail into the Conservatives’ coffin after another."
My view of the current polls is that I would be suspicious of any where Con+Reform<33%. I think if Reform had a better leader (perhaps Farage coming back) then we'd start to see serious movement Con>Ref and DK>Ref
This is right in two respects. it is impossible for the Tories to positively win the GE, but possible for Labour to lose it.
Secondly, actual conservatism is now like proper socialism - completely impossible.
Socialism is impossible because of the difficulties of sustaining wealth creation. Conservatism is impossible because of the near universal agreement that the state is fiscally and practically responsible for all aspects of: Health care, social security for all ages, planning, education and industrial strategy.
The Overton window only allows a tiny segment of opinion and action, encompassed by the European terms 'Social Democrat' and 'Christian Democrat'. Window dressing fills the remaining space.
Yep, it looks very much like Labour are going to go into the next election on a platform - if you ignore their rhetoric and a few eye-catching but token policy flourishes in areas like green energy - of managing the existing state of affairs less incompetently than the Tories. They're going to go our of their way to change as little as possible.
I suspect a tax cut for rich foreigners in central London isn't high on vote winning measures.
VAT Free shopping used to be a big draw for non-EU visitors, but the PM (when Chancellor) decided to scrap it completely rather than extend it to EU countries after we left.
Almost every other country that imposes VAT, allows refunds for goods that are being permanently exported. Shops, especially high-end shops, will be losing a fortune as people choose to visit somewhere else rather than UK.
A reduction in visitor numbers, also costs the Treasury the VAT on the items they consume when in the UK.
I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.
Keith can say what he likes but the problem will be taking the Labour Party with him. Blair managed to do New Labour after changing the party fundamentally including a lot of their MPs.
In the 2024 parliament Starmer will have to put up with a lot of the MP's elected under Jezza in 2017 and 2019 and unlike Blair, who had a 180 seat majority, Starmer will be lucky if he has any majority at all.
Very quickly Starmers government will be doing daily "hand to hand combat" just to stay afloat IMO... The next Parliament is not going to be a happy one.
There was a good article in the Telegraph summing up the current frustrations of conservative votes:
"There was a moment, during the recording of a podcast in front of a London audience on Wednesday night, that should send a shiver down Rishi Sunak’s spine. When asked by our host, Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator and my fellow Telegraph columnist, what reason they would give for voting Conservative at the next general election, the Right-leaning crowd of around 300 could barely summon a response.
After a stony silence had descended on the room, the best answer one chap could muster was: “Because Labour would be even worse.”
I know it has long been said that elections aren’t for the Opposition to win but sitting governments to lose, but seriously? That an audience largely consisting of conservative-minded voters cannot think of a single reason for voting Tory beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s own ineptitude should be a wake up call for the Prime Minister – and yet he ploughs on, hammering one nail into the Conservatives’ coffin after another."
My view of the current polls is that I would be suspicious of any where Con+Reform<33%. I think if Reform had a better leader (perhaps Farage coming back) then we'd start to see serious movement Con>Ref and DK>Ref
Farage is a busted flush and RefUK was never a flush to begin with. Or maybe it was just the sound of a bog flushing?
Erm, anyway - no way on Earth are the Tories polling under a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a bit better than that. I continue to agree with OGH that we're heading for a Hung Parliament.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
There was a good article in the Telegraph summing up the current frustrations of conservative votes:
"There was a moment, during the recording of a podcast in front of a London audience on Wednesday night, that should send a shiver down Rishi Sunak’s spine. When asked by our host, Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator and my fellow Telegraph columnist, what reason they would give for voting Conservative at the next general election, the Right-leaning crowd of around 300 could barely summon a response.
After a stony silence had descended on the room, the best answer one chap could muster was: “Because Labour would be even worse.”
I know it has long been said that elections aren’t for the Opposition to win but sitting governments to lose, but seriously? That an audience largely consisting of conservative-minded voters cannot think of a single reason for voting Tory beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s own ineptitude should be a wake up call for the Prime Minister – and yet he ploughs on, hammering one nail into the Conservatives’ coffin after another."
My view of the current polls is that I would be suspicious of any where Con+Reform<33%. I think if Reform had a better leader (perhaps Farage coming back) then we'd start to see serious movement Con>Ref and DK>Ref
Farage is a busted flush and RefUK was never a flush to begin with. Or maybe it was just the sound of a bog flushing?
Erm, anyway - no way on Earth are the Tories polling under a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a bit better than that. I continue to agree with OGH that we're heading for a Hung Parliament.
Truss in a few short days killed the right. What’s left? Managerialism.
With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.
For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.
On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.
It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.
I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.
I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses
The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
If a pledge merely implies something that implication can safely be ignored as meaningless.
A direct pledge will often fail but at least usually shows intent.
Housebuilding is one of very few levers that Starmer has to deliver two of his pledges. Which is why I expect him to use it.
A reduction in housing costs would be very noticeable - for most it is by far their biggest item of expenditure.
It will take 2 terms to get it rolling and the prices to start to turn.
The one thing not mentioned is minimum room size. There’s good evidence that people living in rabbit hutches has some bad effects on mental health.
As for the NIMBYS - I’d suggest embracing such plans and trying to make the best of them. Or look forward to the FuckTheGreenBelt Party winning an election.
Green belt is another weird one. I am conceptually in favour but really dont see a problem taking 1% out over 50 years when population is growing quickly. It doesn't need to be a free for all, but neither does it need to be a freeze of some arbitrary designations many years ago.
Indeed.
Its often better IMO to turn greenfield brown and brownfield green.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
It has little to do with left or right imo.
I found Corbyn conservative
In what sense?
His views on Europe didn't change over fourty+ years.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
It has little to do with left or right imo.
I found Corbyn conservative
In what sense?
Always turning the clock back to tired hackneyed ideas. Nothing really new.
I suspect a tax cut for rich foreigners in central London isn't high on vote winning measures.
VAT Free shopping used to be a big draw for non-EU visitors, but the PM (when Chancellor) decided to scrap it completely rather than extend it to EU countries after we left.
Almost every other country that imposes VAT, allows refunds for goods that are being permanently exported. Shops, especially high-end shops, will be losing a fortune as people choose to visit somewhere else rather than UK.
A reduction in visitor numbers, also costs the Treasury the VAT on the items they consume when in the UK.
The idea that there would be a significant boost to the UK economy by extra tourists coming so that they can buy imported designer tat at a slightly low price seems doubtful.
And a government offering a tax cut for rich tourists when many voters are suffering from inflation is not going to happen.
This is especially true when we currently have a government which is already damaged on 'one rule for you and another rule for us' grounds.
Do you think that people would be happy having to pay VAT on clothes at ASDA when a tourist doesn't at Harrods ?
I suspect a tax cut for rich foreigners in central London isn't high on vote winning measures.
VAT Free shopping used to be a big draw for non-EU visitors, but the PM (when Chancellor) decided to scrap it completely rather than extend it to EU countries after we left.
Almost every other country that imposes VAT, allows refunds for goods that are being permanently exported. Shops, especially high-end shops, will be losing a fortune as people choose to visit somewhere else rather than UK.
A reduction in visitor numbers, also costs the Treasury the VAT on the items they consume when in the UK.
The idea that there would be a significant boost to the UK economy by extra tourists coming so that they can buy imported designer tat at a slightly low price seems doubtful.
And a government offering a tax cut for rich tourists when many voters are suffering from inflation is not going to happen.
This is especially true when we currently have a government which is already damaged on 'one rule for you and another rule for us' grounds.
Do you think that people would be happy having to pay VAT on clothes at ASDA when a tourist doesn't at Harrods ?
As I commented on Tuesday night as I returned from Paris, Galeries Lafayette and other firms are now offering UK customers a 11-12% discount as we can now reclaim the VAT there.
Which meant that the £1150 handbag Mrs Eek wanted cost me £880 or so.
I suspect a tax cut for rich foreigners in central London isn't high on vote winning measures.
VAT Free shopping used to be a big draw for non-EU visitors, but the PM (when Chancellor) decided to scrap it completely rather than extend it to EU countries after we left.
Almost every other country that imposes VAT, allows refunds for goods that are being permanently exported. Shops, especially high-end shops, will be losing a fortune as people choose to visit somewhere else rather than UK.
A reduction in visitor numbers, also costs the Treasury the VAT on the items they consume when in the UK.
The idea that there would be a significant boost to the UK economy by extra tourists coming so that they can buy imported designer tat at a slightly low price seems doubtful.
And a government offering a tax cut for rich tourists when many voters are suffering from inflation is not going to happen.
This is especially true when we currently have a government which is already damaged on 'one rule for you and another rule for us' grounds.
Do you think that people would be happy having to pay VAT on clothes at ASDA when a tourist doesn't at Harrods ?
As I commented on Tuesday night as I returned from Paris, Galeries Lafayette and other firms are now offering UK customers a 11-12% discount as we can now reclaim the VAT there.
Which meant that the £1150 handbag Mrs Eek wanted cost me £880 or so.
I suspect a tax cut for rich foreigners in central London isn't high on vote winning measures.
VAT Free shopping used to be a big draw for non-EU visitors, but the PM (when Chancellor) decided to scrap it completely rather than extend it to EU countries after we left.
Almost every other country that imposes VAT, allows refunds for goods that are being permanently exported. Shops, especially high-end shops, will be losing a fortune as people choose to visit somewhere else rather than UK.
A reduction in visitor numbers, also costs the Treasury the VAT on the items they consume when in the UK.
The idea that there would be a significant boost to the UK economy by extra tourists coming so that they can buy imported designer tat at a slightly low price seems doubtful.
To be fair, Bicester Village is a massive tourist draw, and its entire shtick is imported designer tat at a slightly low price.
But I agree that whatever the economics of it, the optics are so bad that it’s a non-starter.
I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.
Keith can say what he likes but the problem will be taking the Labour Party with him. Blair managed to do New Labour after changing the party fundamentally including a lot of their MPs.
In the 2024 parliament Starmer will have to put up with a lot of the MP's elected under Jezza in 2017 and 2019 and unlike Blair, who had a 180 seat majority, Starmer will be lucky if he has any majority at all.
Very quickly Starmers government will be doing daily "hand to hand combat" just to stay afloat IMO... The next Parliament is not going to be a happy one.
Radicals: Thatcher, Blair, Brown Conservatives: May, Cameron, Major Populists: Johnson, Truss Managers: Sunak, Callaghan
Hard to say what various LoO might be or might have become once in office. Corbyn liked to think of himself as radical, but was very conservative albeit from an old skool left wing perspective.
The Tory Party with an 80 seat majority - yes 80 seats - feels like it's about to collapse at any moment like we're in a Hung Parliament.
The party simply has run out of ideas and run out of time. It is healthy now that they go.
T
I
M
E
F
O
R
A
C
H
A
N
G
E
As Bill Clinton's guru insisted on putting it:
"It’s the economy, stupid." "Change vs. more of the same" "Don't forget health care."
That's looking like three strikes against the Conservatives.
What's the Conservative message for next time? If they run on "Don't let Labour ruin it", a lot of people will be asking "ruin what?"
They'll probably cut taxes before calling the next election, say that the economy has turned a corner (and that most of what was wrong with it was related to Covid and Russia, and nothing at all to do with us, guv,) and then claim that Labour will hike taxes and cause another car crash. Expect much desperate waving about of the infamous Liam Byrne letter.
It won't yield them another Johnsonian victory, even if Labour's manifesto turns out to be "more of the same" and is shredded during the campaign as a result - but Sunak may do better than anyone's expecting. If I were in his place I'd be looking at abolishing inheritance tax outright (or, at any rate, raising the thresholds so far that it's de facto abolished,) and cutting another penny off the basic rate of income tax, then going to the country - which would necessitate a post-Budget dissolution next Spring.
"🇺🇦 Ukraine Weapons Tracker @UAWeapons #Ukraine: Remains of 🇬🇧 UK-supplied Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles were found at today's and yesterday's missile strike sites in the city of #Luhansk- confirming this new and very potent capability is already used by Ukrainian forces."
Looks like Ukraine lost an arms depot in western/central Ukraine overnight, though, which is a blow, and a rare triumph for Russian attempts to interdict NATO supplies for Ukraine. It would be great if they could use the Storm Shadows to hit the Shahed drones before they were launched.
There are conservatives and radicals in both parties.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals. Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives. Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
It has little to do with left or right imo.
Taking this further I would suggest our prime ministers should mostly be drawn from the conservative pool with the occassional one from the Blair/Thatcher group who can be radical but also respect conservatism. We should avoid the pure radicals, and I say this as someone who dislikes the status quo and wants fairly radical change.
There was a good article in the Telegraph summing up the current frustrations of conservative votes:
"There was a moment, during the recording of a podcast in front of a London audience on Wednesday night, that should send a shiver down Rishi Sunak’s spine. When asked by our host, Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator and my fellow Telegraph columnist, what reason they would give for voting Conservative at the next general election, the Right-leaning crowd of around 300 could barely summon a response.
After a stony silence had descended on the room, the best answer one chap could muster was: “Because Labour would be even worse.”
I know it has long been said that elections aren’t for the Opposition to win but sitting governments to lose, but seriously? That an audience largely consisting of conservative-minded voters cannot think of a single reason for voting Tory beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s own ineptitude should be a wake up call for the Prime Minister – and yet he ploughs on, hammering one nail into the Conservatives’ coffin after another."
My view of the current polls is that I would be suspicious of any where Con+Reform<33%. I think if Reform had a better leader (perhaps Farage coming back) then we'd start to see serious movement Con>Ref and DK>Ref
This is right in two respects. it is impossible for the Tories to positively win the GE, but possible for Labour to lose it.
Secondly, actual conservatism is now like proper socialism - completely impossible.
Socialism is impossible because of the difficulties of sustaining wealth creation. Conservatism is impossible because of the near universal agreement that the state is fiscally and practically responsible for all aspects of: Health care, social security for all ages, planning, education and industrial strategy.
The Overton window only allows a tiny segment of opinion and action, encompassed by the European terms 'Social Democrat' and 'Christian Democrat'. Window dressing fills the remaining space.
Which renders Brexit quite pointless when you think about it. There are no big important beneficial things we want to do that we couldn't have done as members of the EU.
Radicals: Thatcher, Blair, Brown Conservatives: May, Cameron, Major Populists: Johnson, Truss Managers: Sunak, Callaghan
Hard to say what various LoO might be or might have become once in office. Corbyn liked to think of himself as radical, but was very conservative albeit from an old skool left wing perspective.
Hmm... For a "populist" Truss was remarkably unpopular... 😂
Comments
Not that the US president actually has the power to end the war, and that the military industrial complex funding his party wouldn’t want to see anything but a total Russian annihilation.
What worries me is not that he thinks that but that clearly the base like that even if Senate Republicans do not.
https://twitter.com/DAVID_STOIC1/status/1656762315490967555?s=20
It will take 2 terms to get it rolling and the prices to start to turn.
The one thing not mentioned is minimum room size. There’s good evidence that people living in rabbit hutches has some bad effects on mental health.
As for the NIMBYS - I’d suggest embracing such plans and trying to make the best of them. Or look forward to the FuckTheGreenBelt Party winning an election.
I agree with David Herdson- the poll lead is genuine. You can see the swing on the doorstep. If anything, the local elections did not show the true extent. Last year Labour overwhelmingly won in London. Paper candidates won unexpectedly. This year, there was a similar swing against the Tories. The headline results don't show wards and councillors won without knocking on a single door, again with paper candidates winning.
https://twitter.com/cirnosad/status/1657214718153732099?s=20
https://twitter.com/cirnosad/status/1657008220421099520?s=20
And no one is a force for pure good, so that would be an idiotic test designed to allow awful people to go "See, we are no different to that other person who is not percect". The very fact you've assumed I think Gates is pure good because I mocked a cartoon demonstrates the silliness of that.
https://twitter.com/djuric_zlatko/status/1656958227710353411?s=20
Stuart in Romford - those housing plans look a bit of a dog's dinner. How to square housebuilding targets with giving power to local authorities (who will surely do what they can not to build them?) I'm not sure I actually like the idea of home ownership targets either. The government should be focused on two things. Firstly making sure there are enough houses and that they are good quality - an anti poverty strategy is worthless without such a commitment. Secondly maintaining stability in the housing market. It is absurd that we have an economic policy with a near obsessive focus on price stability (or we're supposed to anyway) but the biggest cost in people's lives inextricably linked to the stability of the whole financial system isn't really taken seriously. The attitude that owning your own home is the only thing that matters and the debt involved largely unimportant needs to end.
https://twitter.com/TVajrayana/status/1656701705789095945?s=20
But just for fun - yes, traps are possible. But do you remember a lot Russian leaning posts online saying the retreats around Kharkiv and Kherson were also traps?
Didnt work out that way.
Got to love the classics though - Bakhmut has been destroyed, by the Russians, so Ukraine should not bother trying to retake it.
Just maybe they would like to prevent other Bakhmuts in future?
https://twitter.com/Spriter99880/status/1656724999376457737?s=20
But she was cleaning (she’s carrying a dustpan and brush)
What is likely I think, is that in the election after Labour wins and wins big, as it seems like the Tories are intent on doing a Corbyn Labour.
Up there with that episode of Blackadder where the German spy thought England had three great universities.
https://twitter.com/petesaull/status/1657031050952884225?s=46&t=rw5lNVUgmRPVyKpxfV_pPQ
"Hold on, hold on, because soon He is coming and victory will be ours"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/13/priti-patel-will-blame-local-election-losses-on-tory-leadership-in-speech
NEW: Rishi Sunak has dropped a Spotify Eurovision Rewind..
This is SO cringey. Rishi, please stop.
I don't want praise
I don't want Priti
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2C3f0Atcoo
Have spent the morning reading Christopher Hitchens' memoir Hitch '22. Whilst he's always struck me as an interesting raconteur and columnist I've never fully admired him in the way his fans do. I've got to admit having read the first few chapters on each of his parents as well as a prologue portending his likely death it is gripping stuff. His parents met in the Navy during the war and they seem a bit of an odd couple. Father gets decommissioned and seems embittered at being left behind by johnny come latelies who did nothing during the war. He bristles as the Empire is handed over to some chancers who disregard the law and dislikes the spoiling of the English landscape with new roads and railways. I chortled at the remark he made late in life that if the Channel tunnel gets built he'll never vote Conservative again. By contrast his mother goes all new age in the 60s, various failed attempts at opening a dress shop and eventually falls for another man. She and her 'lover' die in a suicide pact in a Greek hotel.
I've often wondered whether the much maligned Hitchens minor, Peter, puts on something of an act but this has made me realise that he isn't simply the contrarian to the illustrious Christopher (c/f kinabalu) but rather where as Christopher is his mother's son, Peter is his father's. You might never be able to explain everything but the traditionalism, the sympathy with Russian imperial loss, the rejection of market conservatism and detestation of the 60s he expresses make a lot of sense now.
Edit: Columnist/commentators do rub me up the wrong way generally though...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12078747/Now-200-firms-say-tourist-tax-taxed.html
I suspect a tax cut for rich foreigners in central London isn't high on vote winning measures.
PPE can have either meaning in that sentence.
The party simply has run out of ideas and run out of time. It is healthy now that they go.
Why anyone, anywhere, takes Neil seriously after he wrote this column is beyond me 😂
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11244707/ANDREW-NEIL-Truss-taking-gamble-sticking-failed-policies-bigger-one.html
"There was a moment, during the recording of a podcast in front of a London audience on Wednesday night, that should send a shiver down Rishi Sunak’s spine. When asked by our host, Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator and my fellow Telegraph columnist, what reason they would give for voting Conservative at the next general election, the Right-leaning crowd of around 300 could barely summon a response.
After a stony silence had descended on the room, the best answer one chap could muster was: “Because Labour would be even worse.”
I know it has long been said that elections aren’t for the Opposition to win but sitting governments to lose, but seriously? That an audience largely consisting of conservative-minded voters cannot think of a single reason for voting Tory beyond Sir Keir Starmer’s own ineptitude should be a wake up call for the Prime Minister – and yet he ploughs on, hammering one nail into the Conservatives’ coffin after another."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/12/the-conservatives-are-entering-a-death-spiral/
My view of the current polls is that I would be suspicious of any where Con+Reform<33%. I think if Reform had a better leader (perhaps Farage coming back) then we'd start to see serious movement Con>Ref and DK>Ref
If, however, the opposite applies, then there won’t be.
I
M
E
F
O
R
A
C
H
A
N
G
E
"It’s the economy, stupid."
"Change vs. more of the same"
"Don't forget health care."
That's looking like three strikes against the Conservatives.
What's the Conservative message for next time? If they run on "Don't let Labour ruin it", a lot of people will be asking "ruin what?"
L
O
V
E
Y
O
U
Secondly, actual conservatism is now like proper socialism - completely impossible.
Socialism is impossible because of the difficulties of sustaining wealth creation. Conservatism is impossible because of the near universal agreement that the state is fiscally and practically responsible for all aspects of: Health care, social security for all ages, planning, education and industrial strategy.
The Overton window only allows a tiny segment of opinion and action, encompassed by the European terms 'Social Democrat' and 'Christian Democrat'. Window dressing fills the remaining space.
Almost every other country that imposes VAT, allows refunds for goods that are being permanently exported. Shops, especially high-end shops, will be losing a fortune as people choose to visit somewhere else rather than UK.
A reduction in visitor numbers, also costs the Treasury the VAT on the items they consume when in the UK.
In the 2024 parliament Starmer will have to put up with a lot of the MP's elected under Jezza in 2017 and 2019 and unlike Blair, who had a 180 seat majority, Starmer will be lucky if he has any majority at all.
Very quickly Starmers government will be doing daily "hand to hand combat" just to stay afloat IMO... The next Parliament is not going to be a happy one.
Erm, anyway - no way on Earth are the Tories polling under a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a bit better than that. I continue to agree with OGH that we're heading for a Hung Parliament.
I mean, that the last three or four Tories leaders haven't done already.
Corbyn, Johnson, Truss are radicals.
Starmer, Major, Brown, May are conservatives.
Blair & Thatcher a bit of both, depending on the topic and their mood. Perhaps being able to please both was what made them both electorally very popular.
Not quite sure where Sunak fits to be honest. Probably conservative more than radical but leading a party still dominated by radicals.
It has little to do with left or right imo.
Truss in a few short days killed the right. What’s left? Managerialism.
Its often better IMO to turn greenfield brown and brownfield green.
And a government offering a tax cut for rich tourists when many voters are suffering from inflation is not going to happen.
This is especially true when we currently have a government which is already damaged on 'one rule for you and another rule for us' grounds.
Do you think that people would be happy having to pay VAT on clothes at ASDA when a tourist doesn't at Harrods ?
Which meant that the £1150 handbag Mrs Eek wanted cost me £880 or so.
But I agree that whatever the economics of it, the optics are so bad that it’s a non-starter.
The strikes will follow soon after.
Conservatives: May, Cameron, Major
Populists: Johnson, Truss
Managers: Sunak, Callaghan
Hard to say what various LoO might be or might have become once in office. Corbyn liked to think of himself as radical, but was very conservative albeit from an old skool left wing perspective.
It won't yield them another Johnsonian victory, even if Labour's manifesto turns out to be "more of the same" and is shredded during the campaign as a result - but Sunak may do better than anyone's expecting. If I were in his place I'd be looking at abolishing inheritance tax outright (or, at any rate, raising the thresholds so far that it's de facto abolished,) and cutting another penny off the basic rate of income tax, then going to the country - which would necessitate a post-Budget dissolution next Spring.
"🇺🇦 Ukraine Weapons Tracker
@UAWeapons
#Ukraine: Remains of 🇬🇧 UK-supplied Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles were found at today's and yesterday's missile strike sites in the city of #Luhansk- confirming this new and very potent capability is already used by Ukrainian forces."
Looks like Ukraine lost an arms depot in western/central Ukraine overnight, though, which is a blow, and a rare triumph for Russian attempts to interdict NATO supplies for Ukraine. It would be great if they could use the Storm Shadows to hit the Shahed drones before they were launched.