The detail from YouGov’s CON 20% poll – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
I'd be surprised if the Israel/Gaza war has much bearing on either the USA or the UK GE, assuming the latter is autumn or winter. I'd expect the killing to have ended, or died (sic) down by the summer at the latest. People have short memories.0
-
No, I mean the voters in certain areas deciding that Labour are obviously winning the election overall, so sending a Muslim Party MP to the Commons can only help their “community”.ThomasNashe said:
You mean stand as Labour, but renounce the whip shortly after and sit as independents? That I suppose would be possible.Sandpit said:
My thinking was that, if it’s going to be a landslide anyway, then a vote for the Palestine Party might see a couple of MPs who can keep the new Lab government in check on this issue.ThomasNashe said:
Question is where he would stand in the face of a big national swing to Labour. All the Labour MPs in constituencies with big Muslim populations (wisely) abstained from opposing the recent SNP amendment on IG. There’s no one who comes to my mind whom he could 1) depict as an Israeli stooge, and 2) have a chance of ousting.Sandpit said:
I thought about writing his name but decided against it. There’s been a few attempts at a “Muslim Party” in London over the years, thinking of “Respect” and the infamous Lutfur Rahman. It’s easy to imagine that, in the context of a clear Labour win, some of these might gain traction at the election.ThomasNashe said:
Ah, the return of Gorgeous George?Sandpit said:
I have a suspicion that there’s going to be a “Palestine Party” stand in many seats in the UK general election, and might actually win one or two.MoonRabbit said:
Then it is a positive for Labour too, not just Biden, if the polls we are currently looking at can be even better for them, once the Gaza war vote depression unwinds throughout this year. The UK vote is on May 2nd, so not much time now for that post conflict unwind for Labour, but plenty of time for post conflict voter depression to unwind Biden’s side of the pondwilliamglenn said:
Angela Rayner was barracked over Gaza last night.MoonRabbit said:
Would you say that about Biden’s vote over there, but not about Labours vote over here? If you look at the UK poll wiki, Labour has a smile that looks a bit like the Tui logo, the autumn drop before the recovery coincided with the Labour resignations early in the conflict.rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.
I’m agreeing with you. Unless the conflict, and the vote depression, unwinds during the year. It’s a positive for Biden if we already see something in current polling that could unwind.
https://x.com/manpalestine/status/17506395331320177230 -
Or the British and Empire forces in Mespot and Tanganyika, or the Japanese-UK siege of Tsingtao/Qingdao.IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.0 -
Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q0 -
People have to learn that politics is usually a choice between better and worse, not good and evil.kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.7 -
Not so sure, the Top Cop said that they did not bother with chasing the warrant as he had only done what he considered minor assaults on 4 different people including a cop. WTF. Is it any wonder the cops spend more time dancing at LGBT festivals than chasing crooks.OnlyLivingBoy said:
The families have been let down, terribly, but not by the manslaughter charge, which as other have noted is likely the right one given the killer's psychotic state. Mental health services and the police have questions to answer about their engagement with the man in the months leading up to the crime, but I expect that at least some of the answer is that they were being asked to do more than their resources allowed.isam said:
Given that, whether it was murder or manslaughter, he is very unlikely to ever be freed, wouldn’t it be better to convict him of murder?algarkirk said:
If there had been a trial the jury would have convicted him of manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility. Which he pleaded to. The psychiatric evidence was unanimous that his responsibility was at least diminished, so there would have been no lawful basis for a murder conviction.isam said:The CPS reached the conclusion that “There was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction for murder” in the case of Valdo Colocane
Does this mean they think the jury would find him Not Guilty if he had been tried for murder? What would have happened to him in that scenario?
"He believed his mind was being controlled by external influences and that his family was in danger if he didn't obey the voices in his head."
Chief crown prosecutor for the east midlands Janine McKinney speaking about killer Valdo Calocane.
https://x.com/skynews/status/1750499918463037823?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
He would also have been convicted of attempted murder. The special case of diminished responsibility only applies to murder for historical rather than logical reasons.
The convictions recognise real and actual culpability, but diminished. The same can apply when, for example, a wife kills an abusive and violent husband when it is not in self defence.
I say this because the bereaved families are furious at it being manslaughter, they feel let down, and a murder verdict doesn’t seem like it would make any practical difference to the guilty man anyway2 -
That was after the Germans noticed that hitting ships from Stukas was really, really hard, during the Battle of Britain. They missed nearly everything.Carnyx said:
Marginal numbers in 1940, though, of pilots. Another reason to focus on the defensive airfields, and push the air cover away from the Channel. Just been reading about the impact of a rselatively few Stukas on the naval war in the Mediterranean - even with armour on the flight decks of the RN carriers.turbotubbs said:
Most of the ships were kept out of range of the Lufwaffe. There was no need to have the Home Fleet in the channel - we would have known the Germans were coming with enough time to come down from Scapa Flow or where ever.Carnyx said:
A focus on the radar stations, defence airfields and the naval bases and ships should have been maintained. That'd have been much more difficult for the UK, as well as destroying much of the primary defence against invasion (the RN).DecrepiterJohnL said:
Goering thought the same about bombing this country into submission.turbotubbs said:
Hence the Steel not Flesh attitude of the second world war leaders. People like to deride Bomber Harris, but he believed he could defeat Germany from the air, with troops on the ground only need to occupy a defeated nation. Bomber Command lost 55,573 men trying to do this (not all against German cities). Some historians think this was wasted effort and that the vast resources would have been better spent elsewhere (such as Max Hastings) but I think the devastation of German cities, infrastructure and then the complete aerial dominance over the D-Day beached and subsequent campaign show that it was worth it.LostPassword said:
If you think of the three big world wars which has Europe at their centre - Napoleonic War, WWI and WWII - the big difference with WWI is that it is the one where the main action involved the British Army fighting for the duration at the centre of the action. Consequently British losses, of men and money, were much greater.turbotubbs said:
Totally. One of the things I find very interesting is the different attitudes to Germany in 1914-18 compared to the Nazi flavour. And yet they were not that different. Plenty of atrocities, including in occupied parts of the West. And their territorial demands at Brest Litovsk would not be out of place for a Nazi settlement (had sense prevailed at the end of 1941 and they tried for peace.) People like to characterise WW1 as something that shouldn't have been fought, but this is a false interpretation, brought about by too much sodding poetry of by mostly posho public school officers...JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
I like history; but my knowledge is incredibly patchy on so many areas.
If the British Army had been defeated in France in 1914, then even had Britain continued the war until achieving victory over Germany, the cost incurred would likely have been less.
Wars on land are astonishingly destructive, and that naturally makes people wonder if the cost were worthwhile.
But German consistently underestimated how many pilots and planes we had (as they did later with Soviet Tank and manpower).
So the Germans trained a group specifically for anti-shipping work.
Just in time for the Med Campaign.1 -
IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.
Marshal Cadorna ought to have been shot, for his callous incompetence.IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.0 -
I find it more common to be a choice between continued disaster or fresh disaster.Sean_F said:
People have to learn that politics is usually a choice between better and worse, not good and evil.kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.1 -
And all the worst media narrative for the Tories, more boat crossings, growth slump possible recession, covid inquiry interim reports, that could seriously depress Tory voting numbers, Sunak’s ratings and party discipline much more than they are now, are all stacked up in the second half of this year too.Stuartinromford said:
As of now, Labour's lead might even be a bit higher than the same point before 1997;david_herdson said:
I thought it might be interesting to look at past poll leads, given that Labour is regularly hitting the +20s at the moment.NickyBreakspear said:https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
In our latest poll, conducted on the 24th and 25th of January 2024, we’ve observed a small reversal of fortunes in the political landscape, with the Labour Party regaining its lost ground while the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have both experienced declines. The Reform Party has maintained its support, the Green Party has enjoyed a slight increase, and the SNP along with other parties remain steady.
Here are the latest figures, compared to the poll conducted on the 17th and 18th of January 2024:
Lab: 44% (+1)
Con: 24% (-1)
Lib Dem: 10% (-1)
Reform: 9% (=)
Green: 7% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Others: 3% (=)
Public confidence in the government’s ability to address the country’s priorities shows a net decrease, pointing to growing scepticism with a net minus 25%:
Confident: 34%
Not Confident: 59%
The Tories under Cameron never managed a +20 or better lead during the final year of Brown's government. Labour didn't manage it at all between Iraq and Truss. The Tories did, under May and Johnson, though only for a month in the former case, which they then blew in the election campaign.
To be polling this strongly, this late in a parliament is exceptionally rare. It's roughly where Labour was in 2001 (though not 2000). Only Labour in 1996-7 was in a better position - and even then, not by much.
Obviously, a lot can change over 9-10 months but it's difficult to see anything which would obviously improve matters dramatically for the Tories, short of Labour shooting themselves in the foot, which is a risk Labour appears highly tuned to mitigating. Landslide incoming, probably.
https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1748403385160654890
(And the 1997 averages are a bit flattered by the inclusion of some really Labour leaning polls. Gallup still had L57ishC25ish in autumn 1996. ICM, which is probably the most comparable with modern methods was around L47C32.)
There are plenty of reasons to thing that the polling gap shouldn't be this big or stable, but still it doesn't move.0 -
Even on Goodwin's own poll the Tories are still a clear second, he is just using his narrative and reading the poll results accordingly.ThomasNashe said:
If they really are massacred (say reduced to fewer seats than the LDs) it’d be interesting to see whether they could survive. It might be enough to trigger a long term realignment with a hard right anti-immigrant party facing a moderate Labour Party, who could probably accommodate some elements of the more moderate Conservative wing, and which might in turn see the Corbynites peel off to form their own party of the left.rottenborough said:
GB News
@GBNEWS
‘We are witnessing the death of a political party!'
Pollster and Professor of Politics as the University of Kent,
@GoodwinMJ, reacts to the GB News people's poll showing 'widespread disillusionment with potential successors to Sunak.'
===
No, we are not.
It would take ReformUK overtaking the Tories under FPTP for there to be any real realignment and likely ultimate merger between the 2 and even then centrist Tories would be more likely to move to the LDs than Labour, even Starmer Labour0 -
One of the disturbing things about Today's Conservative Party. The intense disagreement between bigendians and littleendians.Sean_F said:
People have to learn that politics is usually a choice between better and worse, not good and evil.kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.
It's the sort of thing that those of us on the centre right used to rightly laugh at lefties for doing. And now the roles have (largely) reversed.1 -
some try , they cleared out the old folk homes good style.Fairliered said:Back on topic, no wonder the Tories tried to keep the elderly alive during Covid, at the expense of the prosperity and mental health of younger people. Imagine the effect on Tory votes if oldies had been allowed to die to protect the rest of the population, and there were 50% fewer over 65s. Or would under 65s have been more grateful and more inclined to vote Tory?
2 -
It is reassuring when you temper @williamglenn and his,"Biden is doomed, Trump will prevail narrative" at every event that arises, with a balanced analysis of what couldrcs1000 said:
I think Biden will definitely lose some Arab American votes, but I don't think those voters are going to actually vote Republican, I think they'll mostly stay at home.williamglenn said:
It's both. They refuse to vote for Biden, and they are dimissive of people saying, "But that means Trump will win!"kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.
https://x.com/tparsi/status/1748902995226407388
Biden thinks that he has the Arab American vote secured because Trump imposed the Muslim Ban.
In Biden's view, preventing Muslims from coming to America is worse than facilitating the slaughter of +24,000 Palestinians in Gaza.
Not a single Arab American I have spoken to agrees
This will, no doubt, have an impact on his vote share, and it could lose him Michigan. But it is worth noting that there simply aren't that many Arab Americans, and not every one of them is going to stay home.
(It is also worth noting that here in LA there were Mosques - admittedly pretty liberal ones - that came out in support of Israel at the beginning of the conflict. Although, I suspect that support may be wavering somewhat now.)
happen and what is unlikely to happen when we see bumps in the road for Biden.
My big fear is the immigration issue, that is not so much a bump as a mountain range in the road. Biden has dropped the ball and seems unable to recover possessions of that ball.0 -
This is also interesting on the wider issue of police - the issue being that nobody in authority went and looked at the problem convictions or told the chaps fitted up even when they knew [edit] the convictions were bent. Not the Met, for a change, though.malcolmg said:
Not so sure, the Top Cop said that they did not bother with chasing the warrant as he had only done what he considered minor assaults on 4 different people including a cop. WTF. Is it any wonder the cops spend more time dancing at LGBT festivals than chasing crooks.OnlyLivingBoy said:
The families have been let down, terribly, but not by the manslaughter charge, which as other have noted is likely the right one given the killer's psychotic state. Mental health services and the police have questions to answer about their engagement with the man in the months leading up to the crime, but I expect that at least some of the answer is that they were being asked to do more than their resources allowed.isam said:
Given that, whether it was murder or manslaughter, he is very unlikely to ever be freed, wouldn’t it be better to convict him of murder?algarkirk said:
If there had been a trial the jury would have convicted him of manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility. Which he pleaded to. The psychiatric evidence was unanimous that his responsibility was at least diminished, so there would have been no lawful basis for a murder conviction.isam said:The CPS reached the conclusion that “There was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction for murder” in the case of Valdo Colocane
Does this mean they think the jury would find him Not Guilty if he had been tried for murder? What would have happened to him in that scenario?
"He believed his mind was being controlled by external influences and that his family was in danger if he didn't obey the voices in his head."
Chief crown prosecutor for the east midlands Janine McKinney speaking about killer Valdo Calocane.
https://x.com/skynews/status/1750499918463037823?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
He would also have been convicted of attempted murder. The special case of diminished responsibility only applies to murder for historical rather than logical reasons.
The convictions recognise real and actual culpability, but diminished. The same can apply when, for example, a wife kills an abusive and violent husband when it is not in self defence.
I say this because the bereaved families are furious at it being manslaughter, they feel let down, and a murder verdict doesn’t seem like it would make any practical difference to the guilty man anyway
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/25/i-just-went-bent-how-britains-most-corrupt-cop-ruined-countless-lives
'In the modest-sized court seven at the Royal Courts of Justice in central London, the children of Saliah Mehmet and Basil Peterkin squeeze into the rows of benches alongside journalists, campaigners and friends. It is the morning of 18 January 2024, almost 47 years since their fathers were imprisoned for conspiracy to steal goods from the Bricklayers Arms depot in south London, where they worked. Three years later, in 1980, the officer who arrested them, along with two of his team, was convicted of the same crime, in the same depot, which they policed.'
'Five years earlier, in 2013, Simmons had called a legal phone-in on LBC radio to ask for advice about his case and was told to try Googling his arresting officer. When he searched for DS Ridgewell of the BTP, he was shocked to discover the officer had been jailed for the identical offence four years after his own conviction. If he hadn’t happened to hear that radio show, it is unlikely he would ever have been cleared – and nor would Ridgewell’s other victims.'1 -
Masters of the Air: pretty slow opening 5 minutes. Usual problem with mumbled dialogue in dark bars. Opening credits suitably epic. Battle photography amazing. Norfolk civilians gawping at US Air Force like they are their salvation (why do Americans get Brits so consistently wrong?) but not too bad an opening episode. Failed raid on Bremen feels typical of many missions.
6/10.1 -
What they usually do , ignore it.TimS said:
Today's interim ICJ ruling is going to create more problems for Western governments. Either they truly believe in the international rules based order, or they don't (or only when it suits them). I can't see Israel abiding by the ruling, so what do the US and UK do then?Sandpit said:
Yes, there could be a stay-at-home “Free Palestine” movement, especially among Muslim communities.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.0 -
Indeed, the start of 1941.Malmesbury said:
That was after the Germans noticed that hitting ships from Stukas was really, really hard, during the Battle of Britain. They missed nearly everything.Carnyx said:
Marginal numbers in 1940, though, of pilots. Another reason to focus on the defensive airfields, and push the air cover away from the Channel. Just been reading about the impact of a rselatively few Stukas on the naval war in the Mediterranean - even with armour on the flight decks of the RN carriers.turbotubbs said:
Most of the ships were kept out of range of the Lufwaffe. There was no need to have the Home Fleet in the channel - we would have known the Germans were coming with enough time to come down from Scapa Flow or where ever.Carnyx said:
A focus on the radar stations, defence airfields and the naval bases and ships should have been maintained. That'd have been much more difficult for the UK, as well as destroying much of the primary defence against invasion (the RN).DecrepiterJohnL said:
Goering thought the same about bombing this country into submission.turbotubbs said:
Hence the Steel not Flesh attitude of the second world war leaders. People like to deride Bomber Harris, but he believed he could defeat Germany from the air, with troops on the ground only need to occupy a defeated nation. Bomber Command lost 55,573 men trying to do this (not all against German cities). Some historians think this was wasted effort and that the vast resources would have been better spent elsewhere (such as Max Hastings) but I think the devastation of German cities, infrastructure and then the complete aerial dominance over the D-Day beached and subsequent campaign show that it was worth it.LostPassword said:
If you think of the three big world wars which has Europe at their centre - Napoleonic War, WWI and WWII - the big difference with WWI is that it is the one where the main action involved the British Army fighting for the duration at the centre of the action. Consequently British losses, of men and money, were much greater.turbotubbs said:
Totally. One of the things I find very interesting is the different attitudes to Germany in 1914-18 compared to the Nazi flavour. And yet they were not that different. Plenty of atrocities, including in occupied parts of the West. And their territorial demands at Brest Litovsk would not be out of place for a Nazi settlement (had sense prevailed at the end of 1941 and they tried for peace.) People like to characterise WW1 as something that shouldn't have been fought, but this is a false interpretation, brought about by too much sodding poetry of by mostly posho public school officers...JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
I like history; but my knowledge is incredibly patchy on so many areas.
If the British Army had been defeated in France in 1914, then even had Britain continued the war until achieving victory over Germany, the cost incurred would likely have been less.
Wars on land are astonishingly destructive, and that naturally makes people wonder if the cost were worthwhile.
But German consistently underestimated how many pilots and planes we had (as they did later with Soviet Tank and manpower).
So the Germans trained a group specifically for anti-shipping work.
Just in time for the Med Campaign.0 -
Apparently the chap wasn't assessed by a psychiatrist on the day of his arrest. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day.malcolmg said:
Not so sure, the Top Cop said that they did not bother with chasing the warrant as he had only done what he considered minor assaults on 4 different people including a cop. WTF. Is it any wonder the cops spend more time dancing at LGBT festivals than chasing crooks.OnlyLivingBoy said:
The families have been let down, terribly, but not by the manslaughter charge, which as other have noted is likely the right one given the killer's psychotic state. Mental health services and the police have questions to answer about their engagement with the man in the months leading up to the crime, but I expect that at least some of the answer is that they were being asked to do more than their resources allowed.isam said:
Given that, whether it was murder or manslaughter, he is very unlikely to ever be freed, wouldn’t it be better to convict him of murder?algarkirk said:
If there had been a trial the jury would have convicted him of manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility. Which he pleaded to. The psychiatric evidence was unanimous that his responsibility was at least diminished, so there would have been no lawful basis for a murder conviction.isam said:The CPS reached the conclusion that “There was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction for murder” in the case of Valdo Colocane
Does this mean they think the jury would find him Not Guilty if he had been tried for murder? What would have happened to him in that scenario?
"He believed his mind was being controlled by external influences and that his family was in danger if he didn't obey the voices in his head."
Chief crown prosecutor for the east midlands Janine McKinney speaking about killer Valdo Calocane.
https://x.com/skynews/status/1750499918463037823?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
He would also have been convicted of attempted murder. The special case of diminished responsibility only applies to murder for historical rather than logical reasons.
The convictions recognise real and actual culpability, but diminished. The same can apply when, for example, a wife kills an abusive and violent husband when it is not in self defence.
I say this because the bereaved families are furious at it being manslaughter, they feel let down, and a murder verdict doesn’t seem like it would make any practical difference to the guilty man anyway
(You get the picture).
Quite why this didn't happen is for an eventual enquiry, but the clinicians involved have had to assess his mental state on a day several months in the past, and this is not ideal.1 -
1
-
When you get to the 12th Battle of the Isonzo. The number is a clue.Sean_F said:IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.
Marshal Cadorna ought to have been shot, for his callous incompetence.IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.2 -
Corrected for youSean_F said:
People have to learn that politics is usually a choice between better worse and even worse still, not good and evil.kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.0 -
Maybe you've lost both your parents and/or grandparents - but as someone who entered Covid in my late 20s, me and my cousins were more concerned about covid on behalf of our grandparents then our grandparents originally were. My Nan's birthday is at the end of March and I remember distinctly that I cancelled our family get together before the lockdowns came in because that would have been 20 odd people across 3 generations all coming together with half a dozen people over the age of 70, a couple of them almost in their 90s.Fairliered said:Back on topic, no wonder the Tories tried to keep the elderly alive during Covid, at the expense of the prosperity and mental health of younger people. Imagine the effect on Tory votes if oldies had been allowed to die to protect the rest of the population, and there were 50% fewer over 65s. Or would under 65s have been more grateful and more inclined to vote Tory?
I have no issue as a "young person" having acted in a way that helped to safeguard the health of the old and vulnerable.1 -
I put a tenner on Labour vote percentage at 48-49.99% at 21/1 last night on BF exchange.david_herdson said:
I thought it might be interesting to look at past poll leads, given that Labour is regularly hitting the +20s at the moment.NickyBreakspear said:https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
In our latest poll, conducted on the 24th and 25th of January 2024, we’ve observed a small reversal of fortunes in the political landscape, with the Labour Party regaining its lost ground while the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have both experienced declines. The Reform Party has maintained its support, the Green Party has enjoyed a slight increase, and the SNP along with other parties remain steady.
Here are the latest figures, compared to the poll conducted on the 17th and 18th of January 2024:
Lab: 44% (+1)
Con: 24% (-1)
Lib Dem: 10% (-1)
Reform: 9% (=)
Green: 7% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Others: 3% (=)
Public confidence in the government’s ability to address the country’s priorities shows a net decrease, pointing to growing scepticism with a net minus 25%:
Confident: 34%
Not Confident: 59%
The Tories under Cameron never managed a +20 or better lead during the final year of Brown's government. Labour didn't manage it at all between Iraq and Truss. The Tories did, under May and Johnson, though only for a month in the former case, which they then blew in the election campaign.
To be polling this strongly, this late in a parliament is exceptionally rare. It's roughly where Labour was in 2001 (though not 2000). Only Labour in 1996-7 was in a better position - and even then, not by much.
Obviously, a lot can change over 9-10 months but it's difficult to see anything which would obviously improve matters dramatically for the Tories, short of Labour shooting themselves in the foot, which is a risk Labour appears highly tuned to mitigating. Landslide incoming, probably.
I doubt it will happen, but if we keep seeing polls in the current range I expect that price to come in a lot and to be able to trade out at a profit.
Traditional wisdom says there will be some swingback to the Tories the closer we get to election day. I actually think this lot are such a shower of shite GE2024 may well be the exception to the rule.
Sunak is gonna be Maybot 2.0, on (diet) coke. The more the voters see of him, the less they like.
0 -
The thing that leaps out straight away David, is where you are looking at leads, not shares? Outside C L Ld in 97 others = 6%, on current polls 20%. Labour lead margins owe to R syphoning of C, historically for 20+ you needed to be pushing 50 not 44?david_herdson said:
I thought it might be interesting to look at past poll leads, given that Labour is regularly hitting the +20s at the moment.NickyBreakspear said:https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
In our latest poll, conducted on the 24th and 25th of January 2024, we’ve observed a small reversal of fortunes in the political landscape, with the Labour Party regaining its lost ground while the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have both experienced declines. The Reform Party has maintained its support, the Green Party has enjoyed a slight increase, and the SNP along with other parties remain steady.
Here are the latest figures, compared to the poll conducted on the 17th and 18th of January 2024:
Lab: 44% (+1)
Con: 24% (-1)
Lib Dem: 10% (-1)
Reform: 9% (=)
Green: 7% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Others: 3% (=)
Public confidence in the government’s ability to address the country’s priorities shows a net decrease, pointing to growing scepticism with a net minus 25%:
Confident: 34%
Not Confident: 59%
The Tories under Cameron never managed a +20 or better lead during the final year of Brown's government. Labour didn't manage it at all between Iraq and Truss. The Tories did, under May and Johnson, though only for a month in the former case, which they then blew in the election campaign.
To be polling this strongly, this late in a parliament is exceptionally rare. It's roughly where Labour was in 2001 (though not 2000). Only Labour in 1996-7 was in a better position - and even then, not by much.
Obviously, a lot can change over 9-10 months but it's difficult to see anything which would obviously improve matters dramatically for the Tories, short of Labour shooting themselves in the foot, which is a risk Labour appears highly tuned to mitigating. Landslide incoming, probably.0 -
I’ve walked those mountains. Fighting up there would have been no fun, at all.Malmesbury said:
When you get to the 12th Battle of the Isonzo. The number is a clue.Sean_F said:IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.
Marshal Cadorna ought to have been shot, for his callous incompetence.IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.0 -
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War4 -
I saw one model of one poll that put the Tories behind the SNP and LDs. I think the Tories can survive if they are the third party, but the fourth would see the party die / merge with Reform. I just wonder if Labour under SKS becomes the de facto centre-right party if that opens a space for Greens / LDs to grow and / or become the de facto centre left party.ThomasNashe said:
If they really are massacred (say reduced to fewer seats than the LDs) it’d be interesting to see whether they could survive. It might be enough to trigger a long term realignment with a hard right anti-immigrant party facing a moderate Labour Party, who could probably accommodate some elements of the more moderate Conservative wing, and which might in turn see the Corbynites peel off to form their own party of the left.rottenborough said:
GB News
@GBNEWS
‘We are witnessing the death of a political party!'
Pollster and Professor of Politics as the University of Kent,
@GoodwinMJ, reacts to the GB News people's poll showing 'widespread disillusionment with potential successors to Sunak.'
===
No, we are not.0 -
No Western political party can magic up growth and prosperity easily anymore, and to some extent we're at the mercy of events.IanB2 said:
Corrected for youSean_F said:
People have to learn that politics is usually a choice between better worse and even worse still, not good and evil.kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.
That's the real problem.1 -
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.1 -
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War1 -
Some data for RFK Jr's fundraising last year.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-nightly/2023/10/23/how-has-rfk-jr-raised-all-that-money-00123069
He's had several 70th birthday party Hollywood fundraisers recently.
I don't get the attraction of the anti-vax grifter, but the US can be an odd place.0 -
The other concern is that most people regard secure mental hospitals as a soft option, hence Calocane has got away with murder. The Sun's editorial today, for instance, says:-turbotubbs said:
Apparently the chap wasn't assessed by a psychiatrist on the day of his arrest. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day.malcolmg said:
Not so sure, the Top Cop said that they did not bother with chasing the warrant as he had only done what he considered minor assaults on 4 different people including a cop. WTF. Is it any wonder the cops spend more time dancing at LGBT festivals than chasing crooks.OnlyLivingBoy said:
The families have been let down, terribly, but not by the manslaughter charge, which as other have noted is likely the right one given the killer's psychotic state. Mental health services and the police have questions to answer about their engagement with the man in the months leading up to the crime, but I expect that at least some of the answer is that they were being asked to do more than their resources allowed.isam said:
Given that, whether it was murder or manslaughter, he is very unlikely to ever be freed, wouldn’t it be better to convict him of murder?algarkirk said:
If there had been a trial the jury would have convicted him of manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility. Which he pleaded to. The psychiatric evidence was unanimous that his responsibility was at least diminished, so there would have been no lawful basis for a murder conviction.isam said:The CPS reached the conclusion that “There was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction for murder” in the case of Valdo Colocane
Does this mean they think the jury would find him Not Guilty if he had been tried for murder? What would have happened to him in that scenario?
"He believed his mind was being controlled by external influences and that his family was in danger if he didn't obey the voices in his head."
Chief crown prosecutor for the east midlands Janine McKinney speaking about killer Valdo Calocane.
https://x.com/skynews/status/1750499918463037823?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
He would also have been convicted of attempted murder. The special case of diminished responsibility only applies to murder for historical rather than logical reasons.
The convictions recognise real and actual culpability, but diminished. The same can apply when, for example, a wife kills an abusive and violent husband when it is not in self defence.
I say this because the bereaved families are furious at it being manslaughter, they feel let down, and a murder verdict doesn’t seem like it would make any practical difference to the guilty man anyway
(You get the picture).
Quite why this didn't happen is for an eventual enquiry, but the clinicians involved have had to assess his mental state on a day several months in the past, and this is not ideal.
But there will be no decades of hard time for him.
Judged schizophrenic, he will spend his life in a cushy mental hospital, perhaps playing snooker, learning the saxophone or painting.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25510550/valdo-calocane-victims-families-sun-says/
Never mind that a high-security psychiatric hospital is far more regimented than any prison, with no free association or privacy, and also that he will almost certainly die there rather than being eligible for parole with a life sentence for murder.1 -
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.0 -
Generally it is not politicians fault, it is the fault of the system in that this stuff never gets in front of the ministers or if it does it is in a mass of other stuff and when ministers query it they are led to believe by civil servants or the PO there is nothing to it and they trust them. Then they move onto item 251 in their massive list of items. They just don't have the time. Having done a FOI on a similar case the ministers get a brief and a draft letter to send out from their civil servants. In the FOIs I have never seen one minister query a brief. They should. They can't and do their job as it is currently structured.Taz said:
Yes, because it is all those evil Tories fault and no one else or no other party has to take any accountability for their actions because. Tories. Innit.TimS said:
Yep, the whole Post Office scandal was Tonty Blair's fault. Tonty and of course SKS as DPP plus Ed Davey as the sole minister with any responsibility.Andy_JS said:"‘I told Blair to cancel Horizon in 1998 – even I could see it was likely to go wrong’
Sir Geoff Mulgan, adviser to multiple PMs, explains how the process was flawed – and why the winner of the next election needs to ‘a reset'"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/01/26/sir-geoff-mulgan-horizon-post-office-tony-blair-fujitsu/
The Tory grift on the PO and their ability to shift blame has been breathtaking and I think quite successful.
That is what leads to these things happening and it needs to change.
Now if we are going to lay blame at politicians the later in the day the more culpable they are because the more warning signs there are. Hence the criticism of the Tories trying to smear Labour and the LDs. I don't blame the Tories for what went wrong, but there were more warning signs for them than anyone else just by the fact that they are the last ones in power. Hence I think Tories politicising this is despicable.
And just for the record the one I am involved in has a Tory government not doing anything and is during a Tory government but I am not blaming them and the campaign (although cross party) is primarily supported by Tory MPs.
Some things should be above petty politics and be about solving the problems.1 -
Zoom out from our politics, and then zoom out some more - and the Conservatives’ secret for having (mostly) dominated our politics for two centuries is that they have been the pragmatic party - able to swallow some radical changes in direction when the national interest demands - whereas their opponents on the left have always put ideology first.Stuartinromford said:
One of the disturbing things about Today's Conservative Party. The intense disagreement between bigendians and littleendians.Sean_F said:
People have to learn that politics is usually a choice between better and worse, not good and evil.kamski said:
Do they actually regard Trump as the lesser of two evils - I mean Trump says all kinds of shit, but he's generally been very pro-Israeli? Or are they just not going to vote for Biden?rcs1000 said:
The Israel - Hamas conflict is definitely going to depress Biden's vote.williamglenn said:
There's an increasingly vocal element of the left that wants Biden to lose purely on foreign policy and regards Trump as the lesser of two evils.kamski said:
Maybe, but I think there is polling showing that more people saying they will vote 'Biden' in Biden vs Trump h2h polling are unhappy with their candidate than those saying they will vote 'Trump', so perhaps a bigger potential to lose Biden voters to other candidates? Depends how convinced they are that it is essential to defeat Trump maybe.noneoftheabove said:
He doesnt need a lot of votes to have a big impact.rcs1000 said:
My guess is that Kennedy will have very little impact on the election.noneoftheabove said:
It should be fascinating, although potentially horrific too. Will Kennedy have an influence, if so who will it hurt the most? Impact of all the court cases? Will the "sane" Republicans finally make a last stand? Turnout differentials from abortion and migration in states with different demographics.rcs1000 said:
The opinion polls think different.tyson said:
I've long thought that Biden will easily beat Trump. They could have indicted Trump eons ago for the January 6th nonsense. FFS he was telling the notrights beforehand to fight like hell on Twitter. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but it suits the Democrats down to the ground to have the Court stuff running in election year and keeping January 6th omnipresentkinabalu said:
My view too. Economy plus incumbency plus uncommitted minds focusing properly on Trump. He loses again and it's not that close.DavidL said:US economy grows 3.3% on an annualised basis in the 4th quarter and by 2.5% in 2023 as a whole. The latest growth was driven by consumption and reflects a surge in consumer confidence: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/19/consumer-sentiment-surges-while-inflation-outlook-dips-university-of-michigan-survey-shows.html
Even Fox News reports that the economy is in a sweet spot with good growth but not so much as to reignite inflation.
I remain of the view that these economic performance figures are going to drive Biden's popularity northwards during the coming months. If we end up with a Biden Trump rematch (and I think we will) it will not be as close as it was in 2020.
Having Trump as the candidate helps a million other Democrats too down ticket fighting their own battles.
Matchup polls at this time are different from previous years because of Trump's name recognition. That is why he is riding high.
Now, with that said, the Democrats outperformed their polling markedly in the midterms, and I expect a little bit of swingback.
But anyone expecting this to be a cakewalk for Biden is engaging in wishcasting.
He could get 10% equally from Trump and Biden and have little impact.
If he got 4% but 3% was from Biden and 1% from Trump it could be pivotal.
And as a Trumpite Democrat with a Democratic heritage name whilst he is now harming Biden in the polling who knows what that will be if he gets more airtime at a time Trump is facing court case after court case. It could be he gets more from Trump than Biden by the time of the election.
It's the sort of thing that those of us on the centre right used to rightly laugh at lefties for doing. And now the roles have (largely) reversed.
Within living memory, their rule was interrupted only by Blair - who managed to marginalise ideology within his own party, putting pragmatism to the fore while the Tories went off on their adventure of ideologically-driven LOTOs. As soon as the Tories recovered their pragmatism under Cameron (flawed though most of his judgements subsequently turned out to be), Labour was out.
With Brexit, Johnson and the unfolding s**tshow following, including the expulsion of much of their pragmatic wing, the Tories have turned their back on realpolitik and tied themselves to their ideological obsessions. I don’t see them returning to government until they find someone able to negate pretty much everything they’ve done since 2015 and return to the path of sensible moderation.1 -
The difference between them is, while the Tories have continuously tried to appease the right, and been mullered as a result, Starmer has defeated the left at every opportunityfelix said:Its likely we can see 150-200 new Labour MPs at the GE, with a large overall majority. Is there any analysis of the likely balance of the party - my fear is a large and strong left-wing cohort - not a majority - but enough to wreak havoc. We know how much damage has occurred on the other side within the Conservatives. I woinder will we see a repeat. I think most voters are broadly centrist - it would be nice if they were governed from a centrist perspective.
2 -
Why couldn't you have gone down the pub and boozed it up with a bunch of other late 20-yr olds while your grandparents were safe at home.148grss said:
Maybe you've lost both your parents and/or grandparents - but as someone who entered Covid in my late 20s, me and my cousins were more concerned about covid on behalf of our grandparents then our grandparents originally were. My Nan's birthday is at the end of March and I remember distinctly that I cancelled our family get together before the lockdowns came in because that would have been 20 odd people across 3 generations all coming together with half a dozen people over the age of 70, a couple of them almost in their 90s.Fairliered said:Back on topic, no wonder the Tories tried to keep the elderly alive during Covid, at the expense of the prosperity and mental health of younger people. Imagine the effect on Tory votes if oldies had been allowed to die to protect the rest of the population, and there were 50% fewer over 65s. Or would under 65s have been more grateful and more inclined to vote Tory?
I have no issue as a "young person" having acted in a way that helped to safeguard the health of the old and vulnerable.0 -
Thats fair. I can't remember the numbers, but the proportion of German divisions confronting the British as opposed to the French and Americans was very high during that time.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.1 -
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.0 -
SKS currently has no power, the left will come roaring back when he does.Scott_xP said:
The difference between them is, while the Tories have continuously tried to appease the right, and been mullered as a result, Starmer has defeated the left at every opportunityfelix said:Its likely we can see 150-200 new Labour MPs at the GE, with a large overall majority. Is there any analysis of the likely balance of the party - my fear is a large and strong left-wing cohort - not a majority - but enough to wreak havoc. We know how much damage has occurred on the other side within the Conservatives. I woinder will we see a repeat. I think most voters are broadly centrist - it would be nice if they were governed from a centrist perspective.
0 -
He says there is a profile of young person who is more likely to use a knife, and that Labour will step in before the damage is donealgarkirk said:
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.
What is the content of this profile? I’d like to hear Sir Keir outline it0 -
That is comparatively good for the Conservatives given PeoplePolling's history.Andy_JS said:Another 20% rating for the Tories.
"Labour 45%
Conservatives 20%
Reform 12%
Lib Dems 10%
@PeoplePolling"4 -
Indeed. But that isn't the popular perception.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
But as was mentioned earlier, by mid-1918, the British army had had four years to learn the new warfare. In WW2, it launched D-Day with little experience of winning land battles outside peripheral arena with much smaller forces, even including Italy (likewise, the US and Canada too).0 -
I'll give you a start - it will be male...isam said:
He says there is a profile of young person who is more likely to use a knife, and that Labour will step in before the damage is donealgarkirk said:
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.
What is the content of this profile? I’d like to hear Sir Keir outline it0 -
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War0 -
It will start with their socio-economic position in society.isam said:
He says there is a profile of young person who is more likely to use a knife, and that Labour will step in before the damage is donealgarkirk said:
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.
What is the content of this profile? I’d like to hear Sir Keir outline it0 -
The inbuilt contradiction of British politics is that while many if not most of the people actively involved in it want radical changes, of hugely varying nature, most of the voters just want sensible moderation. Discuss.2
-
It helped that - by the end - the German forces were starving and poorly equipped. (The result of the British naval blockade.)Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.2 -
I thought they were going to start by measuring the shape of people's heads?TOPPING said:
It will start with their socio-economic position in society.isam said:
He says there is a profile of young person who is more likely to use a knife, and that Labour will step in before the damage is donealgarkirk said:
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.
What is the content of this profile? I’d like to hear Sir Keir outline it0 -
In terms of determining the size of the winning party's majority, by far the most important figure remains the Con/Lab lead.MoonRabbit said:
The thing that leaps out straight away David, is where you are looking at leads, not shares? Outside C L Ld in 97 others = 6%, on current polls 20%. Labour lead margins owe to R syphoning of C, historically for 20+ you needed to be pushing 50 not 44?david_herdson said:
I thought it might be interesting to look at past poll leads, given that Labour is regularly hitting the +20s at the moment.NickyBreakspear said:https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
In our latest poll, conducted on the 24th and 25th of January 2024, we’ve observed a small reversal of fortunes in the political landscape, with the Labour Party regaining its lost ground while the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have both experienced declines. The Reform Party has maintained its support, the Green Party has enjoyed a slight increase, and the SNP along with other parties remain steady.
Here are the latest figures, compared to the poll conducted on the 17th and 18th of January 2024:
Lab: 44% (+1)
Con: 24% (-1)
Lib Dem: 10% (-1)
Reform: 9% (=)
Green: 7% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Others: 3% (=)
Public confidence in the government’s ability to address the country’s priorities shows a net decrease, pointing to growing scepticism with a net minus 25%:
Confident: 34%
Not Confident: 59%
The Tories under Cameron never managed a +20 or better lead during the final year of Brown's government. Labour didn't manage it at all between Iraq and Truss. The Tories did, under May and Johnson, though only for a month in the former case, which they then blew in the election campaign.
To be polling this strongly, this late in a parliament is exceptionally rare. It's roughly where Labour was in 2001 (though not 2000). Only Labour in 1996-7 was in a better position - and even then, not by much.
Obviously, a lot can change over 9-10 months but it's difficult to see anything which would obviously improve matters dramatically for the Tories, short of Labour shooting themselves in the foot, which is a risk Labour appears highly tuned to mitigating. Landslide incoming, probably.
And while Others are indeed polling much higher than pre-2010, Con+Lab probably isn't all that far off, not least because the LDs used to regularly poll in the 20s.0 -
Australia & Canada say hi! Yes, the First World War was odd like that. It came suddenly out of nowhere (37 Days) and was wrapped up in a couple of months, bookending four years of mud and slaughter and to be followed by the Spanish flu pandemic incubated in the trenches that killed more people than the shells and bullets.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
ETA slightly odd is the things that should have made a difference, the revolution in Russia freeing up Germans for the Western front, and the entry of the Americans, turned out not to have been decisive.0 -
Sometimes one needs to state the bleedin' obvious.rcs1000 said:
I thought they were going to start by measuring the shape of people's heads?TOPPING said:
It will start with their socio-economic position in society.isam said:
He says there is a profile of young person who is more likely to use a knife, and that Labour will step in before the damage is donealgarkirk said:
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.
What is the content of this profile? I’d like to hear Sir Keir outline it0 -
Yep - the German troops morale had started to go by that point.rcs1000 said:
It helped that - by the end - the German forces were starving and poorly equipped. (The result of the British naval blockade.)Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
I am always fascinated by the failure of the British (and French) to break German lines before 1918, yet when the Germans attacked in the spring of 1918 they achieved huge advances. Now I know a lot of the reasons (Germans were happy to cede land to create the best defence whereas it was unconscionable that Allies do the same, German defence in depth with thinly held front lines, with the allies not really fully setting up reserve lines etc, German infiltration and shock tactics) but it still surprises. That the British had moved away from weeks of bombardment to surprise was a big factor.2 -
The British Empire covered almost two fifths of the world. The French still more.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
It is not comparable to how Britain is today.1 -
The British Army had also learned immensely from the Boer War. It did not start anew in 1914.david_herdson said:
Indeed. But that isn't the popular perception.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
But as was mentioned earlier, by mid-1918, the British army had had four years to learn the new warfare. In WW2, it launched D-Day with little experience of winning land battles outside peripheral arena with much smaller forces, even including Italy (likewise, the US and Canada too).
Let us admit it fairly, as a business people should,
We have had no end of a lesson: it will do us no end of good.
...
It was our fault, and our very great fault—and now we must turn it to use.
We have forty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse.
So the more we work and the less we talk the better results we shall get—
We have had an Imperial lesson; it may make us an Empire yet!
https://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poem/poems_lesson.htm0 -
"How the border could cost Biden the election
To keep Trump out of power, the Democrats need to make an offer on immigration policy"
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/25/how-the-border-could-cost-biden-the-election0 -
Oh, absolutely.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Australia & Canada say hi! Yes, the First World War was odd like that. It came suddenly out of nowhere (37 Days) and was wrapped up in a couple of months, bookending four years of mud and slaughter and to be followed by the Spanish flu pandemic incubated in the trenches that killed more people than the shells and bullets.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
ETA slightly odd is the things that should have made a difference, the revolution in Russia freeing up Germans for the Western front, and the entry of the Americans, turned out not to have been decisive.
We couldn't have fought (and won) WWI or WWII without Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, South African, West African and, in particular, Indian Army troops all of which we could leverage and deploy. It probably tripled our firepower, or more.
Just relying on home troops alone would have meant we'd been able to do rather little.2 -
Surely not. Quarter of the *land* surface at best. Which makes a quarter of 29% = 7% of the world.Casino_Royale said:
The British Empire covered almost two fifths of the world. The French still more.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
It is not comparable to how Britain is today.0 -
The broken bit is members and activists. People who just want things run well don't join political parties these days; obsessives do - and while obsessives always have, these days their proportionate numbers (and hence power) is far higher. That affects candidate selection, both in selection meetings and in the sort of people who put themselves forward in the first place.IanB2 said:The inbuilt contradiction of British politics is that while many if not most of the people actively involved in it want radical changes, of hugely varying nature, most of the voters just want sensible moderation. Discuss.
4 -
He currently has sufficient power to expel Corbyn, keep the Corbynists away from key seat selections, mould the NEC in his image, and ditch policies advanced under Corbyn.NerysHughes said:
SKS currently has no power, the left will come roaring back when he does.Scott_xP said:
The difference between them is, while the Tories have continuously tried to appease the right, and been mullered as a result, Starmer has defeated the left at every opportunityfelix said:Its likely we can see 150-200 new Labour MPs at the GE, with a large overall majority. Is there any analysis of the likely balance of the party - my fear is a large and strong left-wing cohort - not a majority - but enough to wreak havoc. We know how much damage has occurred on the other side within the Conservatives. I woinder will we see a repeat. I think most voters are broadly centrist - it would be nice if they were governed from a centrist perspective.
The left has been utterly impotent, foaming on the sidelines whilst its project has been systematically torn limb from limb over the past four years, yet you expect people to believe they'll come "roaring back" when Starmer is in Number 10? Total balls.3 -
Yeah, Broadmoor is pretty much like prison as far as the inmates patients are concerned, complete with the massive air-raid siren that wakes up the local community if they ever find themselves one short.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The other concern is that most people regard secure mental hospitals as a soft option, hence Calocane has got away with murder. The Sun's editorial today, for instance, says:-turbotubbs said:
Apparently the chap wasn't assessed by a psychiatrist on the day of his arrest. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day. Or the next day.malcolmg said:
Not so sure, the Top Cop said that they did not bother with chasing the warrant as he had only done what he considered minor assaults on 4 different people including a cop. WTF. Is it any wonder the cops spend more time dancing at LGBT festivals than chasing crooks.OnlyLivingBoy said:
The families have been let down, terribly, but not by the manslaughter charge, which as other have noted is likely the right one given the killer's psychotic state. Mental health services and the police have questions to answer about their engagement with the man in the months leading up to the crime, but I expect that at least some of the answer is that they were being asked to do more than their resources allowed.isam said:
Given that, whether it was murder or manslaughter, he is very unlikely to ever be freed, wouldn’t it be better to convict him of murder?algarkirk said:
If there had been a trial the jury would have convicted him of manslaughter on the ground of diminished responsibility. Which he pleaded to. The psychiatric evidence was unanimous that his responsibility was at least diminished, so there would have been no lawful basis for a murder conviction.isam said:The CPS reached the conclusion that “There was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction for murder” in the case of Valdo Colocane
Does this mean they think the jury would find him Not Guilty if he had been tried for murder? What would have happened to him in that scenario?
"He believed his mind was being controlled by external influences and that his family was in danger if he didn't obey the voices in his head."
Chief crown prosecutor for the east midlands Janine McKinney speaking about killer Valdo Calocane.
https://x.com/skynews/status/1750499918463037823?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
He would also have been convicted of attempted murder. The special case of diminished responsibility only applies to murder for historical rather than logical reasons.
The convictions recognise real and actual culpability, but diminished. The same can apply when, for example, a wife kills an abusive and violent husband when it is not in self defence.
I say this because the bereaved families are furious at it being manslaughter, they feel let down, and a murder verdict doesn’t seem like it would make any practical difference to the guilty man anyway
(You get the picture).
Quite why this didn't happen is for an eventual enquiry, but the clinicians involved have had to assess his mental state on a day several months in the past, and this is not ideal.
But there will be no decades of hard time for him.
Judged schizophrenic, he will spend his life in a cushy mental hospital, perhaps playing snooker, learning the saxophone or painting.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25510550/valdo-calocane-victims-families-sun-says/
Never mind that a high-security psychiatric hospital is far more regimented than any prison, with no free association or privacy, and also that he will almost certainly die there rather than being eligible for parole with a life sentence for murder.2 -
The 100 Days at the end of the war is often credited to Canadian and Australian generals, especially Monash, and especially by Canadians and Australians! On the great number of Indian troops fighting on our side, it is frustrating that ahistorical Dr Who scriptwriters want to plonk them in France.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, absolutely.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Australia & Canada say hi! Yes, the First World War was odd like that. It came suddenly out of nowhere (37 Days) and was wrapped up in a couple of months, bookending four years of mud and slaughter and to be followed by the Spanish flu pandemic incubated in the trenches that killed more people than the shells and bullets.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
ETA slightly odd is the things that should have made a difference, the revolution in Russia freeing up Germans for the Western front, and the entry of the Americans, turned out not to have been decisive.
We couldn't have fought (and won) WWI or WWII without Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, South African, West African and, in particular, Indian Army troops all of which we could leverage and deploy. It probably tripled our firepower, or more.
Just relying on home troops alone would have meant we'd been able to do rather little.0 -
Nah. Britannia ruled 100% of the waves....Carnyx said:
Surely not. Quarter of the *land* surface at best. Which makes a quarter of 29% = 7% of the world.Casino_Royale said:
The British Empire covered almost two fifths of the world. The French still more.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
It is not comparable to how Britain is today.0 -
Yes, 20 000 of a drop of 160 000Casino_Royale said:
So you agree there were cuts under New Labour then?Foxy said:
That's nearly 40 years ago.Casino_Royale said:
In which case it's utterly meaningless.IanB2 said:
Not continuously, but then he didn't say that!Casino_Royale said:
Again, the Tories haven't been in office for the last four decades.DecrepiterJohnL said:Reconsider size of your forces, head of US navy tells Britain
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/reconsider-size-of-your-forces-head-of-us-navy-tells-britain-06pwpkk37 (£££)
Four decades of Tory defence cuts.
Defence spending under Thatcher rose to 1985-1986.
Uk armed forces personnel:
1979: 315 000
1989: 311 000
1997: 210 000
2010: 191 000
2016: 151 000
2023: 143 000
1% drop under Thatcher
33% drop under Major
10% drop under Blair/Brown
21% cut under Cameron
5% cut under May/Johnson/Truss/Sunak
So the big cuts in numbers were under Major and Cameron. Obviously military commitments varied over this period, particularly in Northern Ireland, Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Thanks.1 -
Does he wear blue and white checked trousers, a white jacket, and a big white paper hat?isam said:
He says there is a profile of young person who is more likely to use a knife, and that Labour will step in before the damage is donealgarkirk said:
Unavoidable I suppose that Starmer talks of 'Labour getting knife crime off the streets' but still depressing. Every single dwelling possesses a knife capable of killing someone and this is not going to stop. Every gang member, dealer and knifer knows that you can and will get life sentences with 25-35 year minimums and this does not always deter.isam said:Sir Keir on tv today saying there’s a profile of young man that is quite likely to be using a knife, and they should get support before they use them
What would that profile look like I wonder
https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1750870229540835659?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So it would be good if Labour talked in a more grown up way about the options.
What is the content of this profile? I’d like to hear Sir Keir outline it4 -
Is The Economist as well as The Spectator plagiarising Leon's PB posts now?Andy_JS said:"How the border could cost Biden the election
To keep Trump out of power, the Democrats need to make an offer on immigration policy"
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/25/how-the-border-could-cost-biden-the-election0 -
In which case CR would have claimed 78%!MarqueeMark said:
Nah. Britannia ruled 100% of the waves....Carnyx said:
Surely not. Quarter of the *land* surface at best. Which makes a quarter of 29% = 7% of the world.Casino_Royale said:
The British Empire covered almost two fifths of the world. The French still more.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
It is not comparable to how Britain is today.
Also it's standard doctrine that you can't control the sea. It's not like the infantry on land. But it would be unfair to start a new ar-, discussion as I have to do some sorting out now, so have a good day.0 -
No, not the point I’m making - I’m referring to the standout difference between 97 and 24 in the 6 to 20% others adding fluidity and more unknowns to a situation than historical comparisons can handle. Labour share would only need to slip about 3.5 to 4.5 for a hung Parliament in this situation, “if” Ref support collapses late on to the Conservatives who with that Lab to government swing back PV at 34. 40 v 34. Hung Parliament.david_herdson said:
In terms of determining the size of the winning party's majority, by far the most important figure remains the Con/Lab lead.MoonRabbit said:
The thing that leaps out straight away David, is where you are looking at leads, not shares? Outside C L Ld in 97 others = 6%, on current polls 20%. Labour lead margins owe to R syphoning of C, historically for 20+ you needed to be pushing 50 not 44?david_herdson said:
I thought it might be interesting to look at past poll leads, given that Labour is regularly hitting the +20s at the moment.NickyBreakspear said:https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
In our latest poll, conducted on the 24th and 25th of January 2024, we’ve observed a small reversal of fortunes in the political landscape, with the Labour Party regaining its lost ground while the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have both experienced declines. The Reform Party has maintained its support, the Green Party has enjoyed a slight increase, and the SNP along with other parties remain steady.
Here are the latest figures, compared to the poll conducted on the 17th and 18th of January 2024:
Lab: 44% (+1)
Con: 24% (-1)
Lib Dem: 10% (-1)
Reform: 9% (=)
Green: 7% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)
Others: 3% (=)
Public confidence in the government’s ability to address the country’s priorities shows a net decrease, pointing to growing scepticism with a net minus 25%:
Confident: 34%
Not Confident: 59%
The Tories under Cameron never managed a +20 or better lead during the final year of Brown's government. Labour didn't manage it at all between Iraq and Truss. The Tories did, under May and Johnson, though only for a month in the former case, which they then blew in the election campaign.
To be polling this strongly, this late in a parliament is exceptionally rare. It's roughly where Labour was in 2001 (though not 2000). Only Labour in 1996-7 was in a better position - and even then, not by much.
Obviously, a lot can change over 9-10 months but it's difficult to see anything which would obviously improve matters dramatically for the Tories, short of Labour shooting themselves in the foot, which is a risk Labour appears highly tuned to mitigating. Landslide incoming, probably.
And while Others are indeed polling much higher than pre-2010, Con+Lab probably isn't all that far off, not least because the LDs used to regularly poll in the 20s.
Late changes like these are more credible in current 20+ others, than the much greater wealth of historical comparisons. To be honest, will Ref go from 12 to 3 and C from 25 to 34% - most PBers would say “I don’t expect so.” But not a single PBer will say it’s absolutely 100% not going to happen. It’s scenario built into where we are now, not built into the past. Do you see the point? The other part of it, of course, Lab now on 44 but slipping to a PV perhaps lower even in late 30’s is a lot more of us would think as possible or even likely.
Or put more simply, Lab polling leads you suggested in historical terms mean strength, can be mirage or fools gold in a situation where there’s so much others meaning it might not be a strong as it looks. I did say mirage not farage, now I will say Farage. Farage was more in the game, more popular, more of a UK political leader in the lead up to 2019, yet still the conservatives stripped him, tied him to a lampost and abused him. We need to keep it in mind current ref scores could jump to the Tory total proving Labours poll leads were not as special as all that.0 -
Or just eat whole cuts of unprocessed meat and problem is solved.turbotubbs said:
This is a really important point. Vegan (and vegetarian) food is often held to be a healthier alternative to meat containing products and yet the stuff from the supermarkets is not wholesome food. Far better to source the veg, herbs and spices and make it yourself.Benpointer said:
Meat, vegetarian, or vegan - most sausages are ultra-processed foods. Just look at the list of ingredients in, for example:Nigelb said:
Most sausages are crap, but vegetarian ones are at least likely to be of more consistent quality.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Vegan (or as the kool kids say, plant-based) sausage rolls were outselling the real thing in my global megacorp's staff canteens.Malmesbury said:
Vegan sausages are a strange idea to me - if you don’t want to eat meat, why eat something that looks like a meat product.TheScreamingEagles said:
There are Halal sausages but the vegan ones taste like rubber and I prefer seekh kebabs made from lamb or chicken.Malmesbury said:
Question - given that fine sausages can be made from lamb, beef and venison, are there halal sausages? If not, why not?TheScreamingEagles said:
Well as a good Muslim boy I cannot comment on sausages.Taz said:
So with sausage.TheScreamingEagles said:
I like pineapples, just not on pizza.Taz said:
Excusable on a full English breakfast ?
Lamb or venison sausages are especially good. I always include some in the mix for BBQ. Can’t see why you couldn’t make them without any pork products at all. Or do they?
Lamb kebabs made from pieces of real lamb are magnificent, if done right. The marinading is critical.
Unless I can rely on the quality, I usually opt for the vegetarian choice.
Waitrose No.1 Free Range Lincolnshire Pork Sausages
Pork (91%), water, sage, rice flour, maize flour, sea salt, black pepper, white pepper, stabiliser (triphosphates), preservative (sodium metabisulphite), maize starch, salt, dextrose monohydrate. Filled into calcium alginate casings.
Tesco Finest Pork Sausages
Pork (90%), Water, Rice Flour, Potato Starch, Salt, Acidity Regulator (Calcium Lactate), White Pepper, Sage, Stabilisers (Tetrasodium Diphosphate, Disodium Diphosphate), Coriander, Preservative (Sodium Metabisulphite), Nutmeg, Dextrose, Bamboo Fibre, Caramelised Sugar Syrup, Colour (Paprika Extract).
(Bamboo fibre ffs?)
Linda Mccartney Vegetarian Sausages
Rehydrated Textured Soya Protein (52%), Water, Rapeseed Oil, Soya Protein Concentrate, Seasoning (Sulphites) (Dextrose, Flavourings, Salt, Onion Powder, Yeast Extract, Colour: Red Iron Oxide), Fortified Wheat Flour (Wheat Flour, Calcium Carbonate, Iron, Niacin, Thiamin), Bamboo Fibre, Stabiliser: Methyl Cellulose, Tomato Purée, Salt, Raising Agent: Ammonium Carbonates
Though having said that, if you want sausages there are certainly better options out there. Contrast that incredibly processed Linda Mccartney crap with Heck sausages for instance:
British Pork (97%), Seasoning (Salt, Spices, Gluten Free Rice Flour, Sugar, Preservative (Sodium Sulphite**), Antioxidant (Ascorbic Acid)), Filled into Beef Collagen Casings
That's it. Not a whole list of crap, 97% pork then some seasoning, preservative, antioxidant and casings - no added crap. I'd prefer to have it without sugar personally, but considering its 0.1g of carbs per 100grams it can't be that much sugar added.0 -
DecrepiterJohnL said:
Is The Economist as well as The Spectator plagiarising Leon's PB posts now?Andy_JS said:"How the border could cost Biden the election
To keep Trump out of power, the Democrats need to make an offer on immigration policy"
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/25/how-the-border-could-cost-biden-the-election
“In 2016 Mr Trump rode “border chaos” all the way to the Republican nomination and then on to the presidency. At the time, he campaigned as if record numbers of migrants were coming across the border illegally. That was not true then, but it is now.”DecrepiterJohnL said:
Is The Economist as well as The Spectator plagiarising Leon's PB posts now?Andy_JS said:"How the border could cost Biden the election
To keep Trump out of power, the Democrats need to make an offer on immigration policy"
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/25/how-the-border-could-cost-biden-the-election
1 -
The last German forces to surrender were in Zambia.Carnyx said:
Or the British and Empire forces in Mespot and Tanganyika, or the Japanese-UK siege of Tsingtao/Qingdao.IanB2 said:
Or the Italians and Austrians stuck up in icy mountains where you could barely dig a trench, in conditions and survival rates objectively worse than the Western Front.JosiasJessop said:
I said this before, but a while back I watched a Youtube channel covering the entirety of World War One. I reckon the majority of Brits just think of the big western front battles; perhaps Gallipoli, or even Lawrence of Arabia. In reality the war was much more widespread and complex than that. How many of us in the UK think about the German/Russia side of the war, which was perhaps more significant given the Russian revolution?turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
.
Italy was the first European country to fall to fascism, and it grew from its WW1 experience.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/mbala-wwi-surrender-monument#:~:text=On November 25, 1918, a,returned to German East Africa.
It's hard to beat the 1964 Great War series, which has many first hand interviews and covers the whole war.2 -
Er ... they did serve. Though not in the 100 days, of course, if that is what you mean. Wiki:DecrepiterJohnL said:
The 100 Days at the end of the war is often credited to Canadian and Australian generals, especially Monash, and especially by Canadians and Australians! On the great number of Indian troops fighting on our side, it is frustrating that ahistorical Dr Who scriptwriters want to plonk them in France.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, absolutely.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Australia & Canada say hi! Yes, the First World War was odd like that. It came suddenly out of nowhere (37 Days) and was wrapped up in a couple of months, bookending four years of mud and slaughter and to be followed by the Spanish flu pandemic incubated in the trenches that killed more people than the shells and bullets.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
ETA slightly odd is the things that should have made a difference, the revolution in Russia freeing up Germans for the Western front, and the entry of the Americans, turned out not to have been decisive.
We couldn't have fought (and won) WWI or WWII without Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, South African, West African and, in particular, Indian Army troops all of which we could leverage and deploy. It probably tripled our firepower, or more.
Just relying on home troops alone would have meant we'd been able to do rather little.
"Before being themselves withdrawn to Egypt in March 1918, they took part in the Battle of the Somme, the Battle of Bazentin, the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, the advance to the Hindenburg Line and finally the Battle of Cambrai. Of the 130,000 Indians who served in France and Belgium, almost 9,000 died."
And of course having Indians in the ME to secure the oil meant more British and (other) Dominion troops elsewhere.1 -
Gutted to hear that Klopp is leaving Liverpool. He's been talismanic and really improved the club, as well as coming across as an all-round wonderful person. Not just the first team, but the academy etc have come along in leaps and bounds too - we're getting a lot more players through from the academy than in the past which is great for development.
Hopefully him leaving can more Shankly to Paisley, than Fergie to a rotating pile of crap, when it comes to what comes next.1 -
Everyone remembers (sort of) Jutland but the Royal Navy really did lay the smack down, and was even better at gunnery in WWII (which people tend to remember through the loss of the Hood or the loss of PoW/Repulse) but not it's convey, escort, bombardment or littoral work, which was outstanding.rcs1000 said:
It helped that - by the end - the German forces were starving and poorly equipped. (The result of the British naval blockade.)Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.0 -
@Andy_Cooke Re Battle of Britain
Noted with thanks.
Yes, I was dimly recording a passage from Churchill's war volumes which I read many years ago. Your qualification makes sense and is, I am sure, accurate.0 -
Considering Britain ruled the waves, then two fifths might be underplaying it by your logic.Carnyx said:
Surely not. Quarter of the *land* surface at best. Which makes a quarter of 29% = 7% of the world.Casino_Royale said:
The British Empire covered almost two fifths of the world. The French still more.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
It is not comparable to how Britain is today.0 -
There were some Indian Army forces in France early on, but withdrawn in 1915.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The 100 Days at the end of the war is often credited to Canadian and Australian generals, especially Monash, and especially by Canadians and Australians! On the great number of Indian troops fighting on our side, it is frustrating that ahistorical Dr Who scriptwriters want to plonk them in France.Casino_Royale said:
Oh, absolutely.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Australia & Canada say hi! Yes, the First World War was odd like that. It came suddenly out of nowhere (37 Days) and was wrapped up in a couple of months, bookending four years of mud and slaughter and to be followed by the Spanish flu pandemic incubated in the trenches that killed more people than the shells and bullets.Casino_Royale said:
My 1918 the British army was a very effective fighting force, particularly at combined arms. The 100 days was an exceptional campaign.david_herdson said:
Likewise with WW1:turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
An Austrian archduke was killed - all the soldiers were killed in pointless, muddy, bloody battles - except the ones who were shot for shellshock - because the generals were useless, stubborn poshos - and then we won.
Much more effective than in WWII, FWIW.
ETA slightly odd is the things that should have made a difference, the revolution in Russia freeing up Germans for the Western front, and the entry of the Americans, turned out not to have been decisive.
We couldn't have fought (and won) WWI or WWII without Australian, Canadian, New Zealand, South African, West African and, in particular, Indian Army troops all of which we could leverage and deploy. It probably tripled our firepower, or more.
Just relying on home troops alone would have meant we'd been able to do rather little.
Indeed the first VC awarded to an Indian Army soldier was on the Western Front.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khudadad_Khan1 -
From 1939 is when every inhabited continent in the world, except I believe for South America, was engaged somehow in the war.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
That's not Eurocentric, its just a matter of fact.0 -
How long will Alonso need to bed down is the answer, can he start winning things straight away?BartholomewRoberts said:Gutted to hear that Klopp is leaving Liverpool. He's been talismanic and really improved the club, as well as coming across as an all-round wonderful person. Not just the first team, but the academy etc have come along in leaps and bounds too - we're getting a lot more players through from the academy than in the past which is great for development.
Hopefully him leaving can more Shankly to Paisley, than Fergie to a rotating pile of crap, when it comes to what comes next.0 -
My grandfather caught covid twice while dying of cancer as a nonogenarian. Was like water off a duck's back. But while he was still lucid, his greatest regret was being unable to see more of his family due to the home he was in being locked down for months at a time. Later, while less lucid, it was painful to watch him not understand why nobody had visited in weeks - we weren't allowed to.148grss said:
Maybe you've lost both your parents and/or grandparents - but as someone who entered Covid in my late 20s, me and my cousins were more concerned about covid on behalf of our grandparents then our grandparents originally were. My Nan's birthday is at the end of March and I remember distinctly that I cancelled our family get together before the lockdowns came in because that would have been 20 odd people across 3 generations all coming together with half a dozen people over the age of 70, a couple of them almost in their 90s.Fairliered said:Back on topic, no wonder the Tories tried to keep the elderly alive during Covid, at the expense of the prosperity and mental health of younger people. Imagine the effect on Tory votes if oldies had been allowed to die to protect the rest of the population, and there were 50% fewer over 65s. Or would under 65s have been more grateful and more inclined to vote Tory?
I have no issue as a "young person" having acted in a way that helped to safeguard the health of the old and vulnerable.
There is more to life than merely existing. And lockdown was a very, very painful existence, for many of us.1 -
Agree totally gutted, apparently the board had a couple of months’ notice so hopefully they have someone lined up.BartholomewRoberts said:Gutted to hear that Klopp is leaving Liverpool. He's been talismanic and really improved the club, as well as coming across as an all-round wonderful person. Not just the first team, but the academy etc have come along in leaps and bounds too - we're getting a lot more players through from the academy than in the past which is great for development.
Hopefully him leaving can more Shankly to Paisley, than Fergie to a rotating pile of crap, when it comes to what comes next.
0 -
TSE shouldn't despair, Liverpool will be able to pick up Erik ten Hag at the end of the season...BartholomewRoberts said:Gutted to hear that Klopp is leaving Liverpool. He's been talismanic and really improved the club, as well as coming across as an all-round wonderful person. Not just the first team, but the academy etc have come along in leaps and bounds too - we're getting a lot more players through from the academy than in the past which is great for development.
Hopefully him leaving can more Shankly to Paisley, than Fergie to a rotating pile of crap, when it comes to what comes next.0 -
...
Is there a latter-day Wilf McGuinness or David Moyes waiting in the wings, or is Alonso the man?BartholomewRoberts said:Gutted to hear that Klopp is leaving Liverpool. He's been talismanic and really improved the club, as well as coming across as an all-round wonderful person. Not just the first team, but the academy etc have come along in leaps and bounds too - we're getting a lot more players through from the academy than in the past which is great for development.
Hopefully him leaving can more Shankly to Paisley, than Fergie to a rotating pile of crap, when it comes to what comes next.0 -
Fantastically well said.kyf_100 said:
My grandfather caught covid twice while dying of cancer as a nonogenarian. Was like water off a duck's back. But while he was still lucid, his greatest regret was being unable to see more of his family due to the home he was in being locked down for months at a time. Later, while less lucid, it was painful to watch him not understand why nobody had visited in weeks - we weren't allowed to.148grss said:
Maybe you've lost both your parents and/or grandparents - but as someone who entered Covid in my late 20s, me and my cousins were more concerned about covid on behalf of our grandparents then our grandparents originally were. My Nan's birthday is at the end of March and I remember distinctly that I cancelled our family get together before the lockdowns came in because that would have been 20 odd people across 3 generations all coming together with half a dozen people over the age of 70, a couple of them almost in their 90s.Fairliered said:Back on topic, no wonder the Tories tried to keep the elderly alive during Covid, at the expense of the prosperity and mental health of younger people. Imagine the effect on Tory votes if oldies had been allowed to die to protect the rest of the population, and there were 50% fewer over 65s. Or would under 65s have been more grateful and more inclined to vote Tory?
I have no issue as a "young person" having acted in a way that helped to safeguard the health of the old and vulnerable.
There is more to life than merely existing. And lockdown was a very, very painful existence, for many of us.
We spent a year following the rules, not visiting my grandparents properly, speaking only from the doorstep when I did visit which is not the same thing - only to have my nan have a fall towards the end of the final lockdown which led to a rapid deterioration in her health. First time I saw her after lockdown she was delirious, bedbound and didn't know who I was. I never saw her again as she then entered a carehome under severe visitation restrictions, whose restrictions meant I couldn't visit her again before she died.
Locking away old people, to die from old age without having loved ones come and visit, or spend last lucid weeks or months with them, in order to prevent some deaths from a natural disease was not a price worth paying.
Even before we get onto the terrible effects it had on children, which are still being seen today and will leave a toxic legacy for decades to come.2 -
This snarkiness, typical of the SNat inferiority complex, is remarkable.Carnyx said:
In which case CR would have claimed 78%!MarqueeMark said:
Nah. Britannia ruled 100% of the waves....Carnyx said:
Surely not. Quarter of the *land* surface at best. Which makes a quarter of 29% = 7% of the world.Casino_Royale said:
The British Empire covered almost two fifths of the world. The French still more.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
It is not comparable to how Britain is today.
Also it's standard doctrine that you can't control the sea. It's not like the infantry on land. But it would be unfair to start a new ar-, discussion as I have to do some sorting out now, so have a good day.
You were absolutely part of it. And it allowed Scotland to punch well above its weight, and shape the world.0 -
Liverpool will poach Roberto de Zerbi from Brighton. He's a genius.
You heard it here first. Maybe.1 -
As the regular witterings of BJO on this very board amply demonstrate.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
He currently has sufficient power to expel Corbyn, keep the Corbynists away from key seat selections, mould the NEC in his image, and ditch policies advanced under Corbyn.NerysHughes said:
SKS currently has no power, the left will come roaring back when he does.Scott_xP said:
The difference between them is, while the Tories have continuously tried to appease the right, and been mullered as a result, Starmer has defeated the left at every opportunityfelix said:Its likely we can see 150-200 new Labour MPs at the GE, with a large overall majority. Is there any analysis of the likely balance of the party - my fear is a large and strong left-wing cohort - not a majority - but enough to wreak havoc. We know how much damage has occurred on the other side within the Conservatives. I woinder will we see a repeat. I think most voters are broadly centrist - it would be nice if they were governed from a centrist perspective.
The left has been utterly impotent, foaming on the sidelines whilst its project has been systematically torn limb from limb over the past four years, yet you expect people to believe they'll come "roaring back" when Starmer is in Number 10? Total balls.0 -
Battle of the River Plate?BartholomewRoberts said:
From 1939 is when every inhabited continent in the world, except I believe for South America, was engaged somehow in the war.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
That's not Eurocentric, its just a matter of fact.2 -
There were, I think, Brazilian troops in Italy, on the Allied side.BartholomewRoberts said:
From 1939 is when every inhabited continent in the world, except I believe for South America, was engaged somehow in the war.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
That's not Eurocentric, its just a matter of fact.
0 -
Well the Aston Martin may again surprise at the start of the season, but we’ve consistently seen them relatively unable to develop the car as it progresses.MoonRabbit said:
How long will Alonso need to bed down is the answer, can he start winning things straight away?BartholomewRoberts said:Gutted to hear that Klopp is leaving Liverpool. He's been talismanic and really improved the club, as well as coming across as an all-round wonderful person. Not just the first team, but the academy etc have come along in leaps and bounds too - we're getting a lot more players through from the academy than in the past which is great for development.
Hopefully him leaving can more Shankly to Paisley, than Fergie to a rotating pile of crap, when it comes to what comes next.
0 -
…
Brazil and Argentina saved their support for Nazis for after the war. The famed Plastic Surgeon Corps of Rio and the False Documents Regiment of Buenos Aires certainly had their moments of glory.BartholomewRoberts said:
From 1939 is when every inhabited continent in the world, except I believe for South America, was engaged somehow in the war.david_herdson said:
It is. But copious empires though Britain and France had, they were not the world.Casino_Royale said:
It's accurate for Britain and France though.david_herdson said:
Yes. The only two logical dates for the start of WW2 are 1941, when the various wars across the globe merged into one, or 1937, when the earliest of those regional wars began. 1939 is a Eurocentric insistence.Nigelb said:
China, 1937, is arguably where WWII started.turbotubbs said:
James Holland and Al Murray are good on their Pod (We have ways of making you talk). One of their things is to change the narrative of the second world war. For many of us its very much:Theuniondivvie said:
Thee action stuff was good in The Pacific, the human interest stuff less so, cringey and/or boring.turbotubbs said:
I love BoB, but have never finished the pacific. Don't quite know why.IanB2 said:
Eventually, I expect so, and DVD. The first episode you can watch free to see if you want more; I think there's also a seven day free trial offer, so you can binge the whole thing without payingturbotubbs said:
Early reviews sound very positive. Any idea if it will eventually reach other platforms? Apple is one of the ones I dont subscribe too...IanB2 said:O/T but the third TV drama serial, companion to Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Masters of the Air, is released today from Apple, with the first episode free. One of the two writers worked on the earlier volumes and one of the directors is retained from the Pacific, and Spielberg and Hanks are executive directors.
Dunkirk - Battle of Britain - D-Day - Arnhem - VE day.
There is a lot of truth in that - a lot of fighting went on in 1945 in Western Europe, but most people know little about it. I suspect the pacific is a bit like that for many Brits, as in:
Pearl Harbour - (Midway, maybe?) - Hiroshima/Nagasaki- VJ day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War
That's not Eurocentric, its just a matter of fact.0 -
The hard left is finished. It has a few dinosaurs knocking about, but no numbers. If you want to know what happened to it, look no farther than to the erg, reform, the five families, and the natcons. LeeAnderthal was campaigning for Corbyn just a few years ago. Socialism failed in protecting workers from rampant capitalism, and because capitalism is global, working class people sought refuge in nationalism and the hard right. Now the right must handle the new nationalist iteration of the far left... who hate WEF, Davos, etc. Just to be clear, I am an atlanticist, rejoiner and internationalist. But I can see very clearly the sociological drivers of brexiteerism.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
He currently has sufficient power to expel Corbyn, keep the Corbynists away from key seat selections, mould the NEC in his image, and ditch policies advanced under Corbyn.NerysHughes said:
SKS currently has no power, the left will come roaring back when he does.Scott_xP said:
The difference between them is, while the Tories have continuously tried to appease the right, and been mullered as a result, Starmer has defeated the left at every opportunityfelix said:Its likely we can see 150-200 new Labour MPs at the GE, with a large overall majority. Is there any analysis of the likely balance of the party - my fear is a large and strong left-wing cohort - not a majority - but enough to wreak havoc. We know how much damage has occurred on the other side within the Conservatives. I woinder will we see a repeat. I think most voters are broadly centrist - it would be nice if they were governed from a centrist perspective.
The left has been utterly impotent, foaming on the sidelines whilst its project has been systematically torn limb from limb over the past four years, yet you expect people to believe they'll come "roaring back" when Starmer is in Number 10? Total balls.0 -
I hope they're wearing condomsLeon said:Bangkok is absolutely RAMMED with Chinese
0
This discussion has been closed.