As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
Chris Bryant has just said on Sky that the privileges report will be presented to parliament and voted on
He also said that this would prevent him standing for parliament in the future
It is essential the report is published so we can all see just how malign he is, and no matter our politics it is essential we all endorse the privileges committee and reject Johnson's attack on it and his personal attack on Harriet Harman
All avenues to his return must be closed off
Chris Bryant as Head of the Standards and privileges committee shows how far politics has sunk
That’s his job, though I’d say exposes, rather than shows. And he’s done it very well.
Or was your comment simply baseless abuse ?
You think a man who advertises himself in a mens mag in his underpants together with details of what he was looking for is the type of person we need.?
Why not? What part of that matters in your eyes? Someone who is not ashamed about who he is and is confident in expressing what he wants is precisely what we should look for.
What's a bigger issue to me is having politicians who clearly hate each other for political reasons standing in judgment on each other. That's ripe for abuse, but I don't see any way around that without abolishing the system altogether.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
Even when Rishi was only Chancellor, the Conservatives held Hillingdon council in May 2022 despite losing control of other flagship Tory councils in London like Westminster, Barnet and Wandsworth to Labour
I think the Tories may hold Mid Beds relatively comfortably. Labour is unlikely to give the LDs a clear run because local activists will not allow it - not just in the constituency itself, but it ones nearby. That should be enough to let the Tories through on a much reduced vote share.
This is the interesting question now - how much will Labour understand the boundaries of the reachable universe? I posted that the latest MRP poll suggested that the new Aberdeenshire North & Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats would be won by Labour from 4th on 5%. @TSE did give an example of this happening - SNP defeating Jo Swinson the first time.
Thing is that the SNP in 2015 was a national outcry against The Vow. The national outcry against the Tories doesn't have a unified direction - it isn't that every man jack of you will vote Labour. Its Anyone But Conservative.
So there is a danger here of dickhead Labour absolutists (and the party is full of that mentality) thinking they MUST win every seat no mater how mental that is. Mid Beds looks LibDem all day long, so if Labour go and split the vote like they did in Finchley and Golders Green in 2019, the Tories could hold it.
By the way, I never spoke up in agreement with you about that. I don't see our constituency going Labour, I really don't. Of course it's possible, anything is. But it doesn't feel like it from where I'm sat.
And this matters for me. I most of all want the Tories out at the next election. They need to be on the end of the most vivid spanking possible. Last time I "wasted" my vote on the Lib Dems on a point of principle. This time I'm inclined to vote against the Tories in the most effective way possible. That looked and still looks like the SNP here, but if I genuinely believed Labour were in with a better chance, it would be Labour. The MRP was interesting, but for me it landed some way short of believable. I hope we get more of these before I actually need to decide because I'm definitely of a mind to follow the crowd this time.
Had Banff and Buchan still existed I would vote SNP to get rid of the lickspittle Duguid. Yes I know the SNP are also as bent as a nine bob note. But less so than the billions-of-our-money-stolen Tories.
Post boundary change I am in Aberdeenshire Central. Which is predominantly the old Gordon seat which was LD recently. So I will vote for my own party with good conscience and hope others do the same. In the new AN&ME seat I expect it still needs an SNP vote to dislodge the Tory.
The wildcard in Scotland is what happens to the SNP. Its all gone a bit quiet with their scandals, but if charges are brought and infighting begins then who knows where we go.
What if - and this is speculation - Scottish voters decide its a plague on both their houses?
On topic I think Chris Bryant is indulging in wishful thinking. As I posted last night, the HoC library is explict that an MP, even one who is expelled from Parliament, can immediately stand again. One MP was expelled 3 times (for different offences) and stood and won again on each occasion.
I would like to see Johnson simply disappear but that isn't going to happen and I can easily see him making a comeback some time in the future as the supposed 'saviour' of the Tory party.
Yes. He can run in these byelections if he wants. The issue is that surely he cannot do so as a Conservative.
The Big Question is what the BBBites do now. Its apparently now a fight to save Brexit - the only reason they have removed him is in a plot to overturn the referendum is you listen to people like Campbell-Bannerman.
We have already seen people like Ann Widdicombe defect rightwards. Could a Tory schism be on the cards? Boris to lead an exodus to ReFUK?
Unless we get PR there is no chance of Boris going to RefUK
Even if we get PR there is no chance of Boris going to RefUK.
46% of 2019 Conservative voters say Johnson was right to quit while only 33% say he was wrong
What does “right to quit” mean? It could mean you think it’s right that he goes coz you don’t like him. It could mean you think he’s right that he was hounded out by a kangaroo court coz you do like him.
PS: I take the use of the term “kangaroo court” as a slur on all kangaroos. He’s lost the macropod vote there.
I think the Tories may hold Mid Beds relatively comfortably. Labour is unlikely to give the LDs a clear run because local activists will not allow it - not just in the constituency itself, but it ones nearby. That should be enough to let the Tories through on a much reduced vote share.
This is the interesting question now - how much will Labour understand the boundaries of the reachable universe? I posted that the latest MRP poll suggested that the new Aberdeenshire North & Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats would be won by Labour from 4th on 5%. @TSE did give an example of this happening - SNP defeating Jo Swinson the first time.
Thing is that the SNP in 2015 was a national outcry against The Vow. The national outcry against the Tories doesn't have a unified direction - it isn't that every man jack of you will vote Labour. Its Anyone But Conservative.
So there is a danger here of dickhead Labour absolutists (and the party is full of that mentality) thinking they MUST win every seat no mater how mental that is. Mid Beds looks LibDem all day long, so if Labour go and split the vote like they did in Finchley and Golders Green in 2019, the Tories could hold it.
By the way, I never spoke up in agreement with you about that. I don't see our constituency going Labour, I really don't. Of course it's possible, anything is. But it doesn't feel like it from where I'm sat.
And this matters for me. I most of all want the Tories out at the next election. They need to be on the end of the most vivid spanking possible. Last time I "wasted" my vote on the Lib Dems on a point of principle. This time I'm inclined to vote against the Tories in the most effective way possible. That looked and still looks like the SNP here, but if I genuinely believed Labour were in with a better chance, it would be Labour. The MRP was interesting, but for me it landed some way short of believable. I hope we get more of these before I actually need to decide because I'm definitely of a mind to follow the crowd this time.
Had Banff and Buchan still existed I would vote SNP to get rid of the lickspittle Duguid. Yes I know the SNP are also as bent as a nine bob note. But less so than the billions-of-our-money-stolen Tories.
Post boundary change I am in Aberdeenshire Central. Which is predominantly the old Gordon seat which was LD recently. So I will vote for my own party with good conscience and hope others do the same. In the new AN&ME seat I expect it still needs an SNP vote to dislodge the Tory.
The wildcard in Scotland is what happens to the SNP. Its all gone a bit quiet with their scandals, but if charges are brought and infighting begins then who knows where we go.
What if - and this is speculation - Scottish voters decide its a plague on both their houses?
On topic I think Chris Bryant is indulging in wishful thinking. As I posted last night, the HoC library is explict that an MP, even one who is expelled from Parliament, can immediately stand again. One MP was expelled 3 times (for different offences) and stood and won again on each occasion.
I would like to see Johnson simply disappear but that isn't going to happen and I can easily see him making a comeback some time in the future as the supposed 'saviour' of the Tory party.
Yes. He can run in these byelections if he wants. The issue is that surely he cannot do so as a Conservative.
The Big Question is what the BBBites do now. Its apparently now a fight to save Brexit - the only reason they have removed him is in a plot to overturn the referendum is you listen to people like Campbell-Bannerman.
We have already seen people like Ann Widdicombe defect rightwards. Could a Tory schism be on the cards? Boris to lead an exodus to ReFUK?
Unless we get PR there is no chance of Boris going to RefUK
Even if we get PR there is no chance of Boris going to RefUK.
Next stop for Boris after the Chiltern Hundreds is the Big Bucks....
I think the Tories may hold Mid Beds relatively comfortably. Labour is unlikely to give the LDs a clear run because local activists will not allow it - not just in the constituency itself, but it ones nearby. That should be enough to let the Tories through on a much reduced vote share.
This is the interesting question now - how much will Labour understand the boundaries of the reachable universe? I posted that the latest MRP poll suggested that the new Aberdeenshire North & Moray East, and Aberdeenshire Central seats would be won by Labour from 4th on 5%. @TSE did give an example of this happening - SNP defeating Jo Swinson the first time.
Thing is that the SNP in 2015 was a national outcry against The Vow. The national outcry against the Tories doesn't have a unified direction - it isn't that every man jack of you will vote Labour. Its Anyone But Conservative.
So there is a danger here of dickhead Labour absolutists (and the party is full of that mentality) thinking they MUST win every seat no mater how mental that is. Mid Beds looks LibDem all day long, so if Labour go and split the vote like they did in Finchley and Golders Green in 2019, the Tories could hold it.
By the way, I never spoke up in agreement with you about that. I don't see our constituency going Labour, I really don't. Of course it's possible, anything is. But it doesn't feel like it from where I'm sat.
And this matters for me. I most of all want the Tories out at the next election. They need to be on the end of the most vivid spanking possible. Last time I "wasted" my vote on the Lib Dems on a point of principle. This time I'm inclined to vote against the Tories in the most effective way possible. That looked and still looks like the SNP here, but if I genuinely believed Labour were in with a better chance, it would be Labour. The MRP was interesting, but for me it landed some way short of believable. I hope we get more of these before I actually need to decide because I'm definitely of a mind to follow the crowd this time.
Had Banff and Buchan still existed I would vote SNP to get rid of the lickspittle Duguid. Yes I know the SNP are also as bent as a nine bob note. But less so than the billions-of-our-money-stolen Tories.
Post boundary change I am in Aberdeenshire Central. Which is predominantly the old Gordon seat which was LD recently. So I will vote for my own party with good conscience and hope others do the same. In the new AN&ME seat I expect it still needs an SNP vote to dislodge the Tory.
The wildcard in Scotland is what happens to the SNP. Its all gone a bit quiet with their scandals, but if charges are brought and infighting begins then who knows where we go.
What if - and this is speculation - Scottish voters decide its a plague on both their houses?
On topic I think Chris Bryant is indulging in wishful thinking. As I posted last night, the HoC library is explict that an MP, even one who is expelled from Parliament, can immediately stand again. One MP was expelled 3 times (for different offences) and stood and won again on each occasion.
I would like to see Johnson simply disappear but that isn't going to happen and I can easily see him making a comeback some time in the future as the supposed 'saviour' of the Tory party.
Yes. He can run in these byelections if he wants. The issue is that surely he cannot do so as a Conservative.
The Big Question is what the BBBites do now. Its apparently now a fight to save Brexit - the only reason they have removed him is in a plot to overturn the referendum is you listen to people like Campbell-Bannerman.
We have already seen people like Ann Widdicombe defect rightwards. Could a Tory schism be on the cards? Boris to lead an exodus to ReFUK?
I know it’s been observed before but BJ really is the Tories’ Corbyn. Except BJ is a total self-serving Cnut of course.
On topic I think Chris Bryant is indulging in wishful thinking. As I posted last night, the HoC library is explict that an MP, even one who is expelled from Parliament, can immediately stand again. One MP was expelled 3 times (for different offences) and stood and won again on each occasion.
I would like to see Johnson simply disappear but that isn't going to happen and I can easily see him making a comeback some time in the future as the supposed 'saviour' of the Tory party.
Isn't the point that is being made that if he stood again and was elected as an MP he'd immediately be suspended for 10 days and liable to a local petition for a recall which would immediately lead to another election.
I suspect he would be able to claim that, having been outside of Parliament for much longer than the 10 day suspension he had already effectively been through the recall process.
As I read it, he can claim what he likes, but if at any point in the future the Commons votes to suspend him as a consequence of this report, that will initiate the recall petition process.
Chris Bryant has just said on Sky that the privileges report will be presented to parliament and voted on
He also said that this would prevent him standing for parliament in the future
It is essential the report is published so we can all see just how malign he is, and no matter our politics it is essential we all endorse the privileges committee and reject Johnson's attack on it and his personal attack on Harriet Harman
All avenues to his return must be closed off
Chris Bryant as Head of the Standards and privileges committee shows how far politics has sunk
That’s his job, though I’d say exposes, rather than shows. And he’s done it very well.
Or was your comment simply baseless abuse ?
You think a man who advertises himself in a mens mag in his underpants together with details of what he was looking for is the type of person we need.?
How many decades ago is that now ? That such a thing determines your view if him to this day speaks volumes about you, and says nothing about him. He’s a married man and well respected MP.
I don’t vote Labour, but he’s a great asset to the Commons.
I still quite like BJ; he has an appealing cheeky-chappy persona (although I know that drives some people nuts). But someone being likable does not mean they'll be a good PM or leader.
A rare moment when I agree with Josias - I quite like him, and he was very helpful on animal welfare, which of course is an important plus for me. I expect to run across him in the village where I spend a lot of my time, and will be glad to have a drink with him.
At moment like this, few people are willing to say anything positive, but we're all mixed bags.
My view on Johnson is that he is highly intelligent, but has a lazy brain. I reckon he coasted through school, not having to apply himself much, and he has continued in that way through life. If something interested him or caught his attention, he had the intellect to do it well.
But being PM involves a whole load of nitty-gritty, boring details work. And I reckon he just could not be bothered with those sorts of things a lot of the time, and trusted 'friends' to do it without much follow-up.
Whereas someone who found school less easy, who might be slightly less intelligent, might be a much better PM - because they're used to working blooming hard to get results.
Other may obviously disagree with this.
If you believe that you would have to believe him to be malevolent beyond even what his haters believe him to be. No one with such a 'high degree of intelligence' would have wanted to take the country out of the EU unless for reasons known among Conservatives as 'an Ideology' and no one has ever accused him of having one of those
What utter bollocks; it's a form of the usual Brexit-voters-are-thick stuff we see on here occasionally, and is one of the big reasons that remain lost.
Thick racist or occasionally through a belief that it will benefit them personally. For example farmers and fishermen who thought it would remove competition (erroneously as it turned out). A few believed it might bring back the closed shop. Again to remove competition.
Fascinating isn't it how globalisation seems to require higher pay for the well connected and lower pay for everyone else.
Wait, the experts and their models who said it doesn't were wrong and those of who looked at real world data and said it does were right?
Clearly Michael Gove was onto something.
I assume you won't be pushing back on this fact in future then?
Economists have identified the UK's tight labour market, exacerbated by the impact of Brexit on flows of European Union workers and the impact of the Covid pandemic, as one of the main contributory factors to high domestic inflation.
No, it was an intended consequence of Brexit. Reduce the available pool of labour to force up wages.
I think the Tories may hold Mid Beds relatively comfortably. Labour is unlikely to give the LDs a clear run because local activists will not allow it - not just in the constituency itself, but it ones nearby. That should be enough to let the Tories through on a much reduced vote share.
Yes, I fear this may be the case. The Cherwell debacle shows that the Labour NEC are not inclined to indulge the LibDems in the Blue Wall and are prepared to cut off their own nose in the process. Essentially they want to avoid the LibDems being seen as the default choice in southern England outside London.
Labour exists to promote the interests of Labour, not the interests of the Lib Dem’s.
Or to put it another way, the Cherwell episode showed that Labour exists to promote the interests of Labour, not progress or social justice. The upshot of the NEC shenanigans is that Cherwell has a minority Conservative administration and not a Lab/LD/Green one.
Always helpful to know these things before considering a tactical vote.
Maybe they don't consider that assisting the Lib Dems and Greens would promote either progress or social justice. And, from a purely party poliical viewpoint, why give an opening to rivals on your own side? That was surely, a huge mistake made by the Liberals in the 1900's.
- Murdoch papers still expected to back the Tories (and could be on the losing side for the first time ever). - The Economist is set to endorse Labour for the first time since 2005. - FT viewed as a key swing voter. - https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1667469276066852864
FT will surely back Labour
The FT usually backs Labour. Its editorial line has little in common with its readership.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
I am inclined to give some credence to HYUFD’s comments on Uxbridge. The difference from national swing in areas with large Hindu populations is pretty clear to see from the locals. Not just Leicester.
And Mid Beds is a pretty tough ask for the Lib Dems even with tactical voting.
If the Tories hold these two - against the odds and expectations - that would be a huge game changer for the next election. Could be one of those events that change the narrative.
I fear neither opposition party is playing the expectations management game strongly enough here. A positive swing won’t be enough.
I am inclined to give some credence to HYUFD’s comments on Uxbridge. The difference from national swing in areas with large Hindu populations is pretty clear to see from the locals. Not just Leicester.
And Mid Beds is a pretty tough ask for the Lib Dems even with tactical voting.
If the Tories hold these two - against the odds and expectations - that would be a huge game changer for the next election. Could be one of those events that change the narrative.
I fear neither opposition party is playing the expectations management game strongly enough here. A positive swing won’t be enough.
It might change the narrative; I doubt it will change the game.
I am inclined to give some credence to HYUFD’s comments on Uxbridge. The difference from national swing in areas with large Hindu populations is pretty clear to see from the locals. Not just Leicester.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
This was an interesting suggestion:
Prior to the industrial revolution, war was the best way to get rich (if you won) because land and conquered subjects were so much more valuable than any kind of capital investment (infrastructure, manufacture, tools, etc.) that could have been developed with the same resources. The industrial revolution changes this, both by making war a lot more destructive (thus lowering returns to successful warfare)1 while at the same time massively raising returns to capital investment in things like infrastructure, factories and tractors. It suddenly made more sense, if you coveted your neighbors resources, to build more factories and buy those resources than to try to seize them by force.
I am inclined to give some credence to HYUFD’s comments on Uxbridge. The difference from national swing in areas with large Hindu populations is pretty clear to see from the locals. Not just Leicester.
And Mid Beds is a pretty tough ask for the Lib Dems even with tactical voting.
If the Tories hold these two - against the odds and expectations - that would be a huge game changer for the next election. Could be one of those events that change the narrative.
I fear neither opposition party is playing the expectations management game strongly enough here. A positive swing won’t be enough.
The difference between Uxbridge Hindu voters and Leicester Hindu voters is that the Uxbridge group would have been solidly Tory in 2019. Remember in 2019 the Labour candidate was a devout Muslim with strong views on Kashmir. Maybe someone can give reasons why anyone who voted Labour in U&SR in 2019 would switch to Tory in 2023?
On topic I think Chris Bryant is indulging in wishful thinking. As I posted last night, the HoC library is explict that an MP, even one who is expelled from Parliament, can immediately stand again. One MP was expelled 3 times (for different offences) and stood and won again on each occasion.
I would like to see Johnson simply disappear but that isn't going to happen and I can easily see him making a comeback some time in the future as the supposed 'saviour' of the Tory party.
Isn't the point that is being made that if he stood again and was elected as an MP he'd immediately be suspended for 10 days and liable to a local petition for a recall which would immediately lead to another election.
I suspect he would be able to claim that, having been outside of Parliament for much longer than the 10 day suspension he had already effectively been through the recall process. The electors would have chosen him in full knowledge of his verdict. I don't want to see him back but I think he would win any argument on that basis. All the more so if it is a couple of years down the line.
Remember he sees himself as Churchill so I do think he is playing the long game here. He will disassociate himself from the forthcoming Tory GE defeat and then watch Starmer struggle to make any real impact on the problems the country is facing. Then a nice safe seat for the King over the Water to slip into.
Except Boris will be 64 by the election after next, and probably not a fit sprightly 64 at that. He'll also be bald as a coot, which matters for Boris. The hair is his brand.
I'm sure returning from the wilderness is the story he will tell himself. I'm sure he will collect some deluded followers that way. But it is a delusion, and one that will harm the Conservatives until it finally dies.
Parliament and the public had better blooming well see that report, though.
64 is still young in US political terms.
And given that Boris was born in the USA
Churchill was a month short of 77 when he was elected in 1951.
Chamberlain was 68 Callaghan was 64
Macmillan, Alec Douglas-Home and Atlee were all in their 60s.
Chris Bryant has just said on Sky that the privileges report will be presented to parliament and voted on
He also said that this would prevent him standing for parliament in the future
It is essential the report is published so we can all see just how malign he is, and no matter our politics it is essential we all endorse the privileges committee and reject Johnson's attack on it and his personal attack on Harriet Harman
All avenues to his return must be closed off
Chris Bryant as Head of the Standards and privileges committee shows how far politics has sunk
That’s his job, though I’d say exposes, rather than shows. And he’s done it very well.
Or was your comment simply baseless abuse ?
You think a man who advertises himself in a mens mag in his underpants together with details of what he was looking for is the type of person we need.?
So your problem is he's openly gay?
I sometimes wonder what century squareroot2 lives in. It's none of our business how politicians seek their partners, or what their preference is. We make political life quite hard enough without setting up hurdles like that..
I am inclined to give some credence to HYUFD’s comments on Uxbridge. The difference from national swing in areas with large Hindu populations is pretty clear to see from the locals. Not just Leicester.
Such as?
This for a start, from last year. Same area. I’m hoping it’s not going to be the case but fearing the worst / doing some self-expectation management.
Of course that doesn't apply to his lawyer(s) who allegedly conspired with him to conceal his retaining classified documents.
Were they to be charged with obstruction, the detail in the documents doesn't have to be pre-litigated, so any trial could be quite rapid. Which places rather a lot of pressure on individuals to co-operate with the investigation.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
As a counterbalance read this from foreignaffairs.com an unwinnable war.
- Murdoch papers still expected to back the Tories (and could be on the losing side for the first time ever). - The Economist is set to endorse Labour for the first time since 2005. - FT viewed as a key swing voter. - https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1667469276066852864
FT will surely back Labour
The FT usually backs Labour. Its editorial line has little in common with its readership.
I think it has a lot in common with its readership, who are the woke remainer metro elite blob, like me. Perhaps more Lib Dem or Gaukish inclined than Labour, but certainly not Boris types.
This is also what Julian Ropcke says a columnist at Bild so hardly a Russian propogandist.
If you feel better, screaming at me, calling me a Russian propagandist and blaming me for the loss of tanks an ifv, please just do it. I'm also sad and angry, so I can feel you. #Servicetweet
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
This was an interesting suggestion:
Prior to the industrial revolution, war was the best way to get rich (if you won) because land and conquered subjects were so much more valuable than any kind of capital investment (infrastructure, manufacture, tools, etc.) that could have been developed with the same resources. The industrial revolution changes this, both by making war a lot more destructive (thus lowering returns to successful warfare)1 while at the same time massively raising returns to capital investment in things like infrastructure, factories and tractors. It suddenly made more sense, if you coveted your neighbors resources, to build more factories and buy those resources than to try to seize them by force.
Non violent conquest - which according to some on here does not exist.
This is also what Julian Ropcke says a columnist at Bild so hardly a Russian propogandist.
If you feel better, screaming at me, calling me a Russian propagandist and blaming me for the loss of tanks an ifv, please just do it. I'm also sad and angry, so I can feel you. #Servicetweet
ANALYSIS INFOWAR AFTERNOON JUNE 9 If this kind of videos continue to come for a couple of weeks the entire view of ukrainian and russian capabilities might reverse, as they did in March 2022. Before March 2022 everybody thought that RuAF was highly qualified and a mighty military power. After March 2022 RuAF became ridiculed as parade soldiers totally unsuited for real war. From having been compared to the german Wehrmacht in WWII, they now became the Italians from WWII. Sorry Italy I don't mean any disrespect, but that's how you're ( a bit unfairly) seen. The UkrAF got instead a fantastic reputation as super warriors, at least in the West. This view of ukrainian and russian military capability coloured everybody. Russian military bloggers had of course a higher opinion of their side, but many lost there former confidence and sometimes acted like nervous wrecks at the smallest negative information. But if the ukrainian counteroffensive fails after what seems to be an endless series of suicidal banzai attacks, everybody will be as shocked, as they where in March 2022, but this time about surprising russian prowess and as surprising ukrainian ineptitude. Everything could change in a couple of weeks even in the information war. And that could have an enormous impact of the western will to support Ukraine. An Ukraine with diminishing support from the west, destroyed strategic reserves and lost confidence would go toward a dismal future. A second large refuge wave westwards are just one, of many, possible consequences and there would also be a much increased risk for collapses at the front.
- Murdoch papers still expected to back the Tories (and could be on the losing side for the first time ever). - The Economist is set to endorse Labour for the first time since 2005. - FT viewed as a key swing voter. - https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1667469276066852864
FT will surely back Labour
The FT usually backs Labour. Its editorial line has little in common with its readership.
I think it has a lot in common with its readership, who are the woke remainer metro elite blob, like me. Perhaps more Lib Dem or Gaukish inclined than Labour, but certainly not Boris types.
The FT is a serious business player, so it has to place a premium of telling it as it sees it, rather than acting as a cheerleader for a political party in order to chase circulation in the style of most other papers.
Yep looks like it. You do have to wonder at the mentality of those running these troll factories that they think PB is so important (sadly it isn't) that it has to have its weekly visitor.
The fact that they are so wasteful and uninformed with their propaganda gives some clue as to why the rest of their military machine has performed so abominably.
ANALYSIS INFOWAR AFTERNOON JUNE 9 If this kind of videos continue to come for a couple of weeks the entire view of ukrainian and russian capabilities might reverse, as they did in March 2022. Before March 2022 everybody thought that RuAF was highly qualified and a mighty military power. After March 2022 RuAF became ridiculed as parade soldiers totally unsuited for real war. From having been compared to the german Wehrmacht in WWII, they now became the Italians from WWII. Sorry Italy I don't mean any disrespect, but that's how you're ( a bit unfairly) seen. The UkrAF got instead a fantastic reputation as super warriors, at least in the West. This view of ukrainian and russian military capability coloured everybody. Russian military bloggers had of course a higher opinion of their side, but many lost there former confidence and sometimes acted like nervous wrecks at the smallest negative information. But if the ukrainian counteroffensive fails after what seems to be an endless series of suicidal banzai attacks, everybody will be as shocked, as they where in March 2022, but this time about surprising russian prowess and as surprising ukrainian ineptitude. Everything could change in a couple of weeks even in the information war. And that could have an enormous impact of the western will to support Ukraine. An Ukraine with diminishing support from the west, destroyed strategic reserves and lost confidence would go toward a dismal future. A second large refuge wave westwards are just one, of many, possible consequences and there would also be a much increased risk for collapses at the front.
This is oliver alexander from Denmark another mainstream journalist.
Hard to say anything positive about this. After initially losing 4 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs, 1 Leopard 2A6 and a BMR-2 armored demining vehicle in one location, 4 more M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs drove to the exact same position and started taking loses.
Today we have seen Leopards, the previous “Game Changer”, burning in Ukraine. Remember all the hype and shaming Germany to give them out? It was the only thing Ukraine needed to win decisively! At least back then. I have long suspected that these mega hypes for game changers are actually there solely for the purpose to give the western public hope and drag the war out longer. This is how it works: 1) Situation looks dire for Ukraine. There’s no movement or Russia advances 2) Public opinion starts to shift towards negotiations and people are tired of the war 3) You make up a new story about a weapon that you announce to be the thing that will allow Ukraine to win. Just wait a bit and all will be great! -> Leopard tanks 3) This creates dialogue and hope. People are busy and discuss. Everybody gets excited. 4) After a while the weapon gets send to Ukraine and people trained to be operate them. 5) Everybody is excited to see the game changers, since that’s the decisive moment. But these weapons are held back. 6) Military leaders know that it’s all BS and just empty hype. So, what needs to be done? -> Introduce a new game changer that will allow Ukraine win decisively. But this needs to be hyped before the previous Game Changer is blown up. NOW: F16s 7) The old game changer fails on the battlefield. But it’s ok. Since there’s the new thing, that will come soon. -> Go to point 1) and repeat This just a game of public opinion management and consent manufacturing, to be able to avoid negotiations and drag out the war. They’re playing all of us.
This is oliver alexander from Denmark another mainstream journalist.
Hard to say anything positive about this. After initially losing 4 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs, 1 Leopard 2A6 and a BMR-2 armored demining vehicle in one location, 4 more M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs drove to the exact same position and started taking loses.
Today, Putin confirmed the Ukrainian counter-offensive has begun. However, all Ukrainian attempts thus far have been unsuccessful and the AFU have suffered “significant losses” and the figures are “staggering”. The much anticipated counter-offensive has been a slaughter.
Yep looks like it. You do have to wonder at the mentality of those running these troll factories that they think PB is so important (sadly it isn't) that it has to have its weekly visitor.
The fact that they are so wasteful and uninformed with their propaganda gives some clue as to why the rest of their military machine has performed so abominably.
You could extend that to how Russia as a whole performs as a country.
This is oliver alexander from Denmark another mainstream journalist.
Hard to say anything positive about this. After initially losing 4 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs, 1 Leopard 2A6 and a BMR-2 armored demining vehicle in one location, 4 more M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs drove to the exact same position and started taking loses.
As predicted by military experts the casualty numbers of Ukrainian forces in the counter-offensive are over 10 to 1. They get slaughtered. Russia dominates with air superiority, 10x artillery advantage, mined battlefields, real-time targeting data for smart bombs and missiles.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
As a counterbalance read this from foreignaffairs.com an unwinnable war.
That's a good article (if interminably long) - essentially TLDR: Ukraine and Russia will be mutually hostile indefinitely, and no military outcome will change that, Ukraine may well shift the current frontline but is unlikely to win decisively; Russia cannot win decisively at all without nukes and maybe not even with nukes; therefore a parallel diplomatic effort should be made to achieve an indefinite ceasefire coupled with an unambiguous US guarantee to Ukraine in the event of further fighting.
For those interested in the military detail, Tom Cooper (pro-Ukraine but tries to be factual) is interesting:
Yep looks like it. You do have to wonder at the mentality of those running these troll factories that they think PB is so important (sadly it isn't) that it has to have its weekly visitor.
Maybe it's seen as a perk not to have to spend their time slumming it on Twitter or Facebook for a change :-)
So these two platforms are decimating the Leopards and the Bradley fighting vehicles with the Kornet ATGM system. Russian-tracked 9P162 Kornet-T anti-tank missile carrier and the KA-52 attack helicopter.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
Yes, there are some unusual aspects though concerning the Hindu vote in Leicester. There was a major purge of sitting councillors who tried to vote to end the directly elected mayor role, and it is a bit opaque what all that was about. I think that the dislike of Mayor Soulsby is partly that he is fairly classically Old Labour, but also because of his reaction to the Hindutva street disturbances last September.
There was also the fracas when Corbyn parachuted Webbe into Keith Vaz's old seat. A lot of locals objected quite strongly and went over to the Conservatives.
There is a lot of support for Modi amongst Leicester Hindus, who quite like his Hindu nationalist policies, but to offset that there is a particular dislike of it from Leicester's secular Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, who are also numerous.
Overall, I would expect the small number of racists in the country who moved to REFUK and similar when Sunak was coronation to offset the pro-Hindutva vote for Sunak, to net out nationally, though there may be some constituencies where one side is more prominent.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
As a counterbalance read this from foreignaffairs.com an unwinnable war.
That's a good article (if interminably long) - essentially TLDR: Ukraine and Russia will be mutually hostile indefinitely, and no military outcome will change that, Ukraine may well shift the current frontline but is unlikely to win decisively; Russia cannot win decisively at all without nukes and maybe not even with nukes; therefore a parallel diplomatic effort should be made to achieve an indefinite ceasefire coupled with an unambiguous US guarantee to Ukraine in the event of further fighting.
For those interested in the military detail, Tom Cooper (pro-Ukraine but tries to be factual) is interesting:
No one has a problem with a negotiated settlement Nick. As long as that means Ukraine (all of Ukraine including Crimea and Donbass) gets to decide for themselves as a country who they align with. Joining NATO and the EU as they see fit and Russia has no input at all. That should be the absolute minimum.
The Ukrainians are apparently determined to continue feeding their men and NATO's armor into this new Zaporozhye meat-grinder. And, as widely predicted by many, neither the German Leopard 2A6 nor the American M2 Bradleys are a match for Russian firepower. This is a massacre.
So these two platforms are decimating the Leopards and the Bradley fighting vehicles with the Kornet ATGM system. Russian-tracked 9P162 Kornet-T anti-tank missile carrier and the KA-52 attack helicopter.
The Ukrainians are apparently determined to continue feeding their men and NATO's armor into this new Zaporozhye meat-grinder. And, as widely predicted by many, neither the German Leopard 2A6 nor the American M2 Bradleys are a match for Russian firepower. This is a massacre.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
The Ukrainians are apparently determined to continue feeding their men and NATO's armor into this new Zaporozhye meat-grinder. And, as widely predicted by many, neither the German Leopard 2A6 nor the American M2 Bradleys are a match for Russian firepower. This is a massacre.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
I will miss Centralpark. He was with us for such a short time but brought such joy to our sad, shallow lives. He gave them meaning. That little beam of sunlight is now gone forever - or at least until next Saturday morning.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
Not all, but do you think there might be a minority, perhaps 1-2% of the country, who won't vote for a non-white PM?
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
Yes, there are some unusual aspects though concerning the Hindu vote in Leicester. There was a major purge of sitting councillors who tried to vote to end the directly elected mayor role, and it is a bit opaque what all that was about. I think that the dislike of Mayor Soulsby is partly that he is fairly classically Old Labour, but also because of his reaction to the Hindutva street disturbances last September.
There was also the fracas when Corbyn parachuted Webbe into Keith Vaz's old seat. A lot of locals objected quite strongly and went over to the Conservatives.
There is a lot of support for Modi amongst Leicester Hindus, who quite like his Hindu nationalist policies, but to offset that there is a particular dislike of it from Leicester's secular Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, who are also numerous.
Overall, I would expect the small number of racists in the country who moved to REFUK and similar when Sunak was coronation to offset the pro-Hindutva vote for Sunak, to net out nationally, though there may be some constituencies where one side is more prominent.
An interesting seat to me is Harrow East, which I suspect the Conservatives will hold, on the basis of what is now a huge Indian Conservative vote. Bob Blackman was ahead of the curve, by cultivating that community, over the course of thirty years. Brent North might also move back into play, at some point.
There always was an Indian Conservative vote in both seats, but in the 90's and 00's, demographic change outpaced the growth of that vote. Now, that vote seems to have grown sufficiently to outpace demographic change.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
Not all, but do you think there might be a minority, perhaps 1-2% of the country, who won't vote for a non-white PM?
There will always 1 to 2 % of population who will find a reason not to vote for a candidate.
Apparently you hear every so often in focus groups men saying we shouldn’t have women PMs simply because they might get emotional at that time of the month and make bad decisions.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
Not all, but do you think there might be a minority, perhaps 1-2% of the country, who won't vote for a non-white PM?
Yes, I think so - but it's a very tiny minority.
Just as you get tiny minorities for all sorts of nutty opinions in any country.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
Yes, there are some unusual aspects though concerning the Hindu vote in Leicester. There was a major purge of sitting councillors who tried to vote to end the directly elected mayor role, and it is a bit opaque what all that was about. I think that the dislike of Mayor Soulsby is partly that he is fairly classically Old Labour, but also because of his reaction to the Hindutva street disturbances last September.
There was also the fracas when Corbyn parachuted Webbe into Keith Vaz's old seat. A lot of locals objected quite strongly and went over to the Conservatives.
There is a lot of support for Modi amongst Leicester Hindus, who quite like his Hindu nationalist policies, but to offset that there is a particular dislike of it from Leicester's secular Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, who are also numerous.
Overall, I would expect the small number of racists in the country who moved to REFUK and similar when Sunak was coronation to offset the pro-Hindutva vote for Sunak, to net out nationally, though there may be some constituencies where one side is more prominent.
An interesting seat to me is Harrow East, which I suspect the Conservatives will hold, on the basis of what is now a huge Indian Conservative vote. Bob Blackman was ahead of the curve, by cultivating that community, over the course of thirty years. Brent North might also move back into play, at some point.
There always was an Indian Conservative vote in both seats, but in the 90's and 00's, demographic change outpaced the growth of that vote. Now, that vote seems to have grown sufficiently to outpace demographic change.
Professional Indians that I've worked with can be very right-wing.
What do those trolls think they are achieving? I thought the GRU was better than this. You have to play the long game chaps. Infiltrate this site with quality material on eating out, cricket, steam trains, and obscure political trivia from the 50s; and then spend 30% of your time arguing over trans issues. Get those things right and you can then say any old #### and be listened to. You might even get a thread header.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
Not all, but do you think there might be a minority, perhaps 1-2% of the country, who won't vote for a non-white PM?
There will always 1 to 2 % of population who will find a reason not to vote for a candidate.
Apparently you hear every so often in focus groups men saying we shouldn’t have women PMs simply because they might get emotional at that time of the month and make bad decisions.
Prime Ministerial Tension is a constant. The tension being what the rest of us feel about when the feckers are going to make their next bad decision.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
As a counterbalance read this from foreignaffairs.com an unwinnable war.
That's a good article (if interminably long) - essentially TLDR: Ukraine and Russia will be mutually hostile indefinitely, and no military outcome will change that, Ukraine may well shift the current frontline but is unlikely to win decisively; Russia cannot win decisively at all without nukes and maybe not even with nukes; therefore a parallel diplomatic effort should be made to achieve an indefinite ceasefire coupled with an unambiguous US guarantee to Ukraine in the event of further fighting.
For those interested in the military detail, Tom Cooper (pro-Ukraine but tries to be factual) is interesting:
No one has a problem with a negotiated settlement Nick. As long as that means Ukraine (all of Ukraine including Crimea and Donbass) gets to decide for themselves as a country who they align with. Joining NATO and the EU as they see fit and Russia has no input at all. That should be the absolute minimum.
One of the problems is populations don’t stand still. If something has been seized and held for a while, or been a miserable war zone, can there be an approved UN backed negotiated settlement based on votes in the region that doesn’t rubber stamp original evil intent and let them get away with it?
For example, if you had a vote exactly here in land being fought over today at one point of history, the Cossacks would have won - I believe they were Cossacks, not Russian, Polish, Ukrainian or Lithuanian. But there is nothing in this world today, certainly not the United Nations, who at any point in history would have accepted a Cossack win.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
Not all, but do you think there might be a minority, perhaps 1-2% of the country, who won't vote for a non-white PM?
And that's it, that's the truth. It's not about whether Tories are racist and other voters aren't. You'll find racists in all walks of life. The only reason I mentioned Conservative voters is because I'm seeking the potential of negative effects that might balance the supposed positive effects HYUFD mentions. Racist Labour voters aren't the issue in this particular case because they are already not going to vote Tory, doubly so.
I've no idea whether your 1-2% is a fair estimate or not. But it's there, it exists, and it's fiercely naive for Casino to assert otherwise.
The Labour candidate is v ginger. What about the anti-ginger vote?
I take it with all these threads by TSE that OGH is holiday?
We should have known the shit was going to his the fan big time... 😂
It’s going to be a nice quiet weekend topping up the tan. Everything will be nice and quiet. Cocktails in the sun. No need for PB. No need for Malmesbury to get his Davey Crocket out. Not that there is any kind of day that actually needs Malmesbury to get his Davey Crocket out.
If there's one thing that could make me sympathetic to Boris Johnson it's Guy Vertwatstadt sounding his mouth off.
I have a soft spot for him. He's a complete basketcase but he sure doesn't hold back, including when he thinks his beloved EU is not living up to what he wants it to be.
He came to our house in Uccle for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq's passepartout though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir or playing with my Scalextric. According to my late mother, he disappeared into the scullery and spontaneously started washing the dishes at about 11pm.
For all those of you who don't speak @Dura_Ace, here is an annotation
He (Guy Verhofstadt, a Belgian liberal politician) came to our house in Uccle (a town in Belgium) for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq (another Belgian liberal politician)'s passepartout (bagman, general assistant) though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir (stuck on this one: could be anything from homework to wanking) or playing with my Scalextric (a popular toy for boys in the pre-computer days, involving toy cars and an electrified track)
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
Yes, there are some unusual aspects though concerning the Hindu vote in Leicester. There was a major purge of sitting councillors who tried to vote to end the directly elected mayor role, and it is a bit opaque what all that was about. I think that the dislike of Mayor Soulsby is partly that he is fairly classically Old Labour, but also because of his reaction to the Hindutva street disturbances last September.
There was also the fracas when Corbyn parachuted Webbe into Keith Vaz's old seat. A lot of locals objected quite strongly and went over to the Conservatives.
There is a lot of support for Modi amongst Leicester Hindus, who quite like his Hindu nationalist policies, but to offset that there is a particular dislike of it from Leicester's secular Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, who are also numerous.
Overall, I would expect the small number of racists in the country who moved to REFUK and similar when Sunak was coronation to offset the pro-Hindutva vote for Sunak, to net out nationally, though there may be some constituencies where one side is more prominent.
An interesting seat to me is Harrow East, which I suspect the Conservatives will hold, on the basis of what is now a huge Indian Conservative vote. Bob Blackman was ahead of the curve, by cultivating that community, over the course of thirty years. Brent North might also move back into play, at some point.
There always was an Indian Conservative vote in both seats, but in the 90's and 00's, demographic change outpaced the growth of that vote. Now, that vote seems to have grown sufficiently to outpace demographic change.
Professional Indians that I've worked with can be very right-wing.
Thankfully their children less so. Takes a generation to assimilate properly.
If there's one thing that could make me sympathetic to Boris Johnson it's Guy Vertwatstadt sounding his mouth off.
I have a soft spot for him. He's a complete basketcase but he sure doesn't hold back, including when he thinks his beloved EU is not living up to what he wants it to be.
He came to our house in Uccle for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq's passepartout though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir or playing with my Scalextric. According to my late mother, he disappeared into the scullery and spontaneously started washing the dishes at about 11pm.
For all those of you who don't speak @Dura_Ace, here is an annotation
He (Guy Verhofstadt, a Belgian liberal politician) came to our house in Uccle (a town in Belgium) for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq (another Belgian liberal politician)'s passepartout (bagman, general assistant) though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir (stuck on this one: could be anything from homework to wanking) or playing with my Scalextric (a popular toy for boys in the pre-computer days, involving toy cars and an electrified track)
Devoir is homework. There’s no code here, although I didn’t know who Le Clercq was.
Also, Uccle is a (prosperous) suburb of Brussels, not “a town”.
Fascinating isn't it how globalisation seems to require higher pay for the well connected and lower pay for everyone else.
The Conservatives have restructured the economy to continually import more and more cheap workers, disposing of the old ones like fuses. It's an assembly line designed to eat the poor for their labour and spit out the bits. Labour are applauding this.
As I said: Its been reported quite widely that Starmer and Davey get on very well and have conversations. So I assume that they have already Tehran Conferenced the coming byelections: Rutherglen: Labour Mid Beds: LibDems Uxbridge: Labour
If the Tories pick a local councillor in nearly 10% Hindu Uxbridge they could even win it under Rishi.
Would be amusing if Labour lost Uxbridge but the LDs won Mid Beds which I think is possible.
Leaving Labour's only gain from the SNP not the Tories in Rutherglen
I don’t know what is more sad.
Your assumption that Hindus will vote, as a block, for a Hindu, or the fact that your assumption is probably correct.
Our politics shouldn’t work like this.
Leicester has the highest Hindu percentage of voters in the UK and the Tories had their best result in the local elections in the UK by far in Leicester in May gaining 17 seats from Labour. Hindus may only be less than 2% of the UK population but for them having one of their own as UK PM is as big as Obama being US President was for African Americans. Where the Hindu population is well above average there may even be a swing to the Conservatives while Rishi is PM
And do you think the opposite could be true? Voters who see brown-skinned Hindu and change their vote from Conservative to something else? Given that Hindus are outnumbered in Uxbridge by Christians, atheists, and Muslims, do you think the PM's ethnicity and religion could count more against than for him?
No.
You've never met a racist? Lucky you.
You desperately want all Conservatives or Conservative-inclined voters to be racist because this would conveniently fit your world view.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
Not all, but do you think there might be a minority, perhaps 1-2% of the country, who won't vote for a non-white PM?
And that's it, that's the truth. It's not about whether Tories are racist and other voters aren't. You'll find racists in all walks of life. The only reason I mentioned Conservative voters is because I'm seeking the potential of negative effects that might balance the supposed positive effects HYUFD mentions. Racist Labour voters aren't the issue in this particular case because they are already not going to vote Tory, doubly so.
I've no idea whether your 1-2% is a fair estimate or not. But it's there, it exists, and it's fiercely naive for Casino to assert otherwise.
The Labour candidate is v ginger. What about the anti-ginger vote?
I totally agree. Labour have parachuted a Starmerite duffer in from Camben, Ginger, looks more like Prince Harry than the one Sky hired this week (though that’s not saying much) Labour have already blown this election.
However, they have been canny enough in their algorithm to put their “B Ark” campaigners onto the coach to Mid Beds, so they got that bit right.
If there's one thing that could make me sympathetic to Boris Johnson it's Guy Vertwatstadt sounding his mouth off.
I have a soft spot for him. He's a complete basketcase but he sure doesn't hold back, including when he thinks his beloved EU is not living up to what he wants it to be.
He came to our house in Uccle for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq's passepartout though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir or playing with my Scalextric. According to my late mother, he disappeared into the scullery and spontaneously started washing the dishes at about 11pm.
For all those of you who don't speak @Dura_Ace, here is an annotation
He (Guy Verhofstadt, a Belgian liberal politician) came to our house in Uccle (a town in Belgium) for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq (another Belgian liberal politician)'s passepartout (bagman, general assistant) though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir (stuck on this one: could be anything from homework to wanking) or playing with my Scalextric (a popular toy for boys in the pre-computer days, involving toy cars and an electrified track)
fuck is a scullery though?
A quick look at the Wikipedia page for Uccle suggests it's easily posh enough to have houses with sculleries.
Also, under the "Notable Inhabitants" section, one B. Johnson and family.
Comments
What's a bigger issue to me is having politicians who clearly hate each other for political reasons standing in judgment on each other. That's ripe for abuse, but I don't see any way around that without abolishing the system altogether.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2023/06/it-is-assumed-boris-would-lose-a-by-election-but-would-he/
Even when Rishi was only Chancellor, the Conservatives held Hillingdon council in May 2022 despite losing control of other flagship Tory councils in London like Westminster, Barnet and Wandsworth to Labour
Clearly Michael Gove was onto something.
Except BJ is a total self-serving Cnut of course.
The FT usually backs Labour. Its editorial line has little in common with its readership.
@Cicero and others. I enjoyed this piece from Brett Devereaux, analysing why Russian military performance has been so poor (and the same may turn out to be true of other vaunted militaries). I also take his point that (counter-intuitively, WMD, especially nukes, save lives.)
And Mid Beds is a pretty tough ask for the Lib Dems even with tactical voting.
If the Tories hold these two - against the odds and expectations - that would be a huge game changer for the next election. Could be one of those events that change the narrative.
I fear neither opposition party is playing the expectations management game strongly enough here. A positive swing won’t be enough.
This isn't a resignation statement; it's a temper tantrum.
And its central claim is untrue.
Johnson says he was "forced out anti-democratically" by a "kangaroo court".
So let's remind ourselves of the process from which he has chosen to run away... 🧵
https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1667285583985537024
Boris is effectively saying that the entire House of Commons, where his party has an overwhelming majority, is a kangaroo court biased against him.
Prior to the industrial revolution, war was the best way to get rich (if you won) because land and conquered subjects were so much more valuable than any kind of capital investment (infrastructure, manufacture, tools, etc.) that could have been developed with the same resources. The industrial revolution changes this, both by making war a lot more destructive (thus lowering returns to successful warfare)1 while at the same time massively raising returns to capital investment in things like infrastructure, factories and tractors. It suddenly made more sense, if you coveted your neighbors resources, to build more factories and buy those resources than to try to seize them by force.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/65863200
Expert Backgrounder: Secret Evidence in Public Trials
Protecting defendants and national security under the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA)
https://www.justsecurity.org/86812/secret-evidence-in-public-trials-protecting-defendants-and-national-security-under-the-classified-information-procedures-act/
TLDR - this would likely require at least a six month process before any actual trial.
Chamberlain was 68
Callaghan was 64
Macmillan, Alec Douglas-Home and Atlee were all in their 60s.
What is amazing is that after paying £45m for all of Leeds Utd in 2017 Radrizzani is now able to sell his remaining 56% for £170m.
That's an enormous capital gain on an investment which doesn't seem to have performed very well.
And do all these now football club owners understand the law of diminishing returns ?
There is after all only a finite number of trophies to be won and top players to be purchased.
I’m hoping it’s not going to be the case but fearing the worst / doing some self-expectation management.
https://m.timesofindia.com/world/uk/british-indian-vote-considered-main-reason-for-conservatives-only-council-gain-in-uk-local-elections/amp_articleshow/91409037.cms
Were they to be charged with obstruction, the detail in the documents doesn't have to be pre-litigated, so any trial could be quite rapid.
Which places rather a lot of pressure on individuals to co-operate with the investigation.
https://twitter.com/Chooselife63/status/1667165236518895616?s=20
If you feel better, screaming at me, calling me a Russian propagandist and blaming me for the loss of tanks an ifv, please just do it. I'm also sad and angry, so I can feel you. #Servicetweet
https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1667188694669746176?s=20
https://twitter.com/MikaelValterss1/status/1667213009012310019?s=20
A club with Leeds' record in a poorer locale wouldn't be.
* and if you have the resources never to be a forced seller.
The fact that they are so wasteful and uninformed with their propaganda gives some clue as to why the rest of their military machine has performed so abominably.
Hard to say anything positive about this. After initially losing 4 M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs, 1 Leopard 2A6 and a BMR-2 armored demining vehicle in one location, 4 more M2A2 Bradley ODS-SA IFVs drove to the exact same position and started taking loses.
https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1667190618248847360?s=20
https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1667259405929271307?s=20
https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/1667294486580305920?s=20
https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1667220822094925825?s=20
For those interested in the military detail, Tom Cooper (pro-Ukraine but tries to be factual) is interesting:
https://xxtomcooperxx.substack.com/p/ukraine-war-10-june-2023-minefields?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Feel very low after watching Ukrainian losses. Want to watch Ukraine come out victorious in the end
4:18 PM · Jun 9, 2023
·
3,550
Views
https://twitter.com/VishnuBhadran93/status/1667189374579261440?s=20
https://twitter.com/Retiremyass/status/1667170160073900038?s=20
But isn't the market now more worldwide based ?
And to attract fair weather fans throughout the world then trophies need to be won.
There was also the fracas when Corbyn parachuted Webbe into Keith Vaz's old seat. A lot of locals objected quite strongly and went over to the Conservatives.
There is a lot of support for Modi amongst Leicester Hindus, who quite like his Hindu nationalist policies, but to offset that there is a particular dislike of it from Leicester's secular Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims, who are also numerous.
Overall, I would expect the small number of racists in the country who moved to REFUK and similar when Sunak was coronation to offset the pro-Hindutva vote for Sunak, to net out nationally, though there may be some constituencies where one side is more prominent.
https://twitter.com/imetatronink/status/1667160501955231744?s=20
That's no fun.
Byeee!!!
Which is richly ironic given the bile we read about from republicans on here.
Only one man can stop the slaughter of these Ukrainian men and that is the repressed homosexual Vladimir Putin.
Unfortunately for you, it's not true; your prejudices are just that.
There always was an Indian Conservative vote in both seats, but in the 90's and 00's, demographic change outpaced the growth of that vote. Now, that vote seems to have grown sufficiently to outpace demographic change.
Apparently you hear every so often in focus
groups men saying we shouldn’t have women PMs simply because they might get emotional at that time of the month and make bad decisions.
Just as you get tiny minorities for all sorts of nutty opinions in any country.
The tension being what the rest of us feel about when the feckers are going to make their next bad decision.
We should have known the shit was going to his the fan big time... 😂
For example, if you had a vote exactly here in land being fought over today at one point of history, the Cossacks would have won - I believe they were Cossacks, not Russian, Polish, Ukrainian or Lithuanian. But there is nothing in this world today, certainly not the United Nations, who at any point in history would have accepted a Cossack win.
There are other ways to underpin Ukrainian security.
What about the anti-ginger vote?
He (Guy Verhofstadt, a Belgian liberal politician) came to our house in Uccle (a town in Belgium) for a dinner party when he was Willy De Clercq (another Belgian liberal politician)'s passepartout (bagman, general assistant) though I have no recollection of it as I was 10 and was probably doing my devoir (stuck on this one: could be anything from homework to wanking) or playing with my Scalextric (a popular toy for boys in the pre-computer days, involving toy cars and an electrified track)
Takes a generation to assimilate properly.
There’s no code here, although I didn’t know who Le Clercq was.
Also, Uccle is a (prosperous) suburb of Brussels, not “a town”.
I wanted to ask if he was a Doug Stander, Pop Side, Kop or HenPenner?
How about this:
Russia stop invading other nations, and agree to a 10m demilitarisation zone across all their borders.
Sounds fair to me given they are the constant aggressor in this region.
https://www.dyson.co.uk/outlet
However, they have been canny enough in their algorithm to put their “B Ark” campaigners onto the coach to Mid Beds, so they got that bit right.
Also, under the "Notable Inhabitants" section, one B. Johnson and family.