The glorious MIC and Norstat have come over the hill to the rescue showing the Cons with over 20% and as many as 100 or even 110 seats. The champagne corks are a-popping in No 10!
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
Phil Foden is having his third child at the age of 24. Fair play to him in addressing thr demographic crisis - but it shows what can be done if you don't have to worry about bedrooms or childcare costs.
Kyle Walker has six kids, some less then 9 months apart
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv) is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
How many other countries are entitled to invade their neighbours to right a 'historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance' ?
Palestine
We can probably invade france on those grounds
Since when did we need any grounds to invade France?
Phil Foden is having his third child at the age of 24. Fair play to him in addressing thr demographic crisis - but it shows what can be done if you don't have to worry about bedrooms or childcare costs.
I note a hint of bitterness there. But your point is basically correct. Footballers wages were always obscene but at a time when much of the country us struggling they have become totally immoral. A maximum wage would be a good idea. And before any clown talks about the market there are always foreign billionaires willing to bail out football clubs so there is no market.
I would trial a maximum wage for footballers in Scotland, just to fuck Rangers and Celtic and attempt to provide a more competitive league.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Strange 3 way and 4 way marginals can throw up weird outcomes…
Have had another look at my own seat. This MRP claims that DRoss will finish in 3rd behind Labour. Remember that the Labour candidate isn't a Labour candidate and wasn't campaigning even before he was booted.
I mean, it would be piss funny if it happened, but come on...
Happy image from my evening. Victoria Tap, Manchester. Three old ladies. Well dressed old ladies, but dressed like old ladies used to dress: smart floral dresses. Glasses of white wine in front of them. Break off from.their earnest and animated conversation to sing along lustily as tge Zombies' "She's not there" comes on over the speakers. Which I suppose is the same vintage they are, but rather cooler than what you would normally exoect women in their late 70s and 80s be into. Good grief it's late. Then back to their conversation. Clearly Talking Heads doesn't catch their imagination the same way.
Another 0-0 being ground out on the telly. Good grief football is turgid.
i think this is my favourite genre of PB, the little vignettes of PBers’ lives
One of the great things that @MikeSmithson did - and may all good fortune and good wishes go with him - is gather together a spectacularly disparate group of intelligent people. Yes we may verge towards the geeky, but we also verge towards WTAF. We have fabulously eloquent nutters like @Dura_Ace and we also have insanely centrist sensibles like @kle4. More importantly, it gathers in generally civil conversation a bunch of properly smart people with wildly different perspectives and experiences, and thanks to the gentle moderation - kudos to @TSE and @rcs1000 - it remains quite cordial even as it allows vicious rivalries
That’s really hard to achieve. I’m sure we all take different things from this site, but for me one of the most precious is articulate glimpses of other lives, other worlds, like this what you just did
I’ll stop being sentimental now and go back to insulting David Duke of Brexit, the Gaylording Ponceyboots Hisself, Mr Daveyboy “I think I’d be good at it, oops I’m historically terrible” Cameron, but just wanted to get that out there
Vanilla - the only thing in the known universe more useless than the Department for Education.
I disagree. The Perl programming language would give it a run for its money. The only "write once, never edit" language known.
Perl was write once, make sure it works and then never ever go near it again.
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
Mr £8k will be getting suspended shortly and that is tomorrow's media...particularly that it is a real serious amount, not the £5-20 that Jack was betting.
Phil Foden is having his third child at the age of 24. Fair play to him in addressing thr demographic crisis - but it shows what can be done if you don't have to worry about bedrooms or childcare costs.
Kyle Walker has six kids, some less then 9 months apart
If he keeps this up he could be a future Tory PM. He’s got the bumbling inarticulation and he’s on the right wing. Closing in on the kids by different mothers ratio. And he’s going to be involved in taking us out of Europe.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Strange 3 way and 4 way marginals can throw up weird outcomes…
Have had another look at my own seat. This MRP claims that DRoss will finish in 3rd behind Labour. Remember that the Labour candidate isn't a Labour candidate and wasn't campaigning even before he was booted.
I mean, it would be piss funny if it happened, but come on...
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
Putinbot 1 on full nonsense whataboutism today I see.
I'm a Putin not now am I. I was a CCHQ bot last week according to some here.
He was asked about illegal immigration. The problem is that there's a different version of the clip, which is edited, has the order he said things mixed up, and has any context about illegal immigration being taken out.
That appears to be the one being shared, and it gives the impression he's talking generally about sending people back to Bangladesh, which is why it's causing such a fuss.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
You are pathetic. Are you saying that no-one in the country except you has interrogated the Labour manifesto? Seriously? Do you have so little faith in the electorate? You have to realise that you have failed and there is a better option on the table.
Doug, I'd be amazed if more than one person in a hundred has scrutinised a manifesto of any colour.
(puts hand up)
Some nice person (I forget whom) put up the main points on this very board. I was very bored.
Austria to win the Euros is currently trading at around 19. It’s been steadily falling all day from 25 this morning, as people realise that they’ve got a potentially easy route (Turkey and then maybe Romania) to the Semis…where they might face England…who don’t look great themselves currently.
As a trading bet, I expect it to fall further once tonight’s fixtures have concluded, and the hype around Austria’s path goes more and more viral on social media - because we will have the usual images of the full bracket of knockouts - which we don’t have now.
You could cash out tomorrow for a good profit, I think, and then decide to let some run / keep a fraction as you see fit.
They have a pressing style which will be helped by the fact they get a full week off between Tuesday and next Tuesday. More time to rest, whereas teams like England get 2 days fewer rest.
The Sun last night, Sir Philip said, “What’s it go to do with you whether I did or didn’t” place the bet. He added: “I hope to win. I'm busting a gut to win. I expect to lose. In the 2005 election, I busted a gut to win. I expected to lose. I had a bet on myself to lose in the 2005 election, and my bet went down the pan."
That ok that you did it before and lost.....hmmm....do these people not do any PR training?
Its an insurance policy. If he loses his job he gets the payout.
Same as betting on your wife having twins (I knew someone who did that - and won). If you win the bet you get some money to help with the consequence.
Nearly all of us place a bet at long odds that our house will catch fire, after all.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv) is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
How many other countries are entitled to invade their neighbours to right a 'historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance' ?
Palestine
We can probably invade france on those grounds
The Treaty of Troyes is all the legal grounds you could want.
All you really have to do is is say you disagree with the last 100 years of developments in international law, resign from the UN, and claim right of conquest. One for the next Reform manifesto.
But "Feels Nationalism" trumps all of the stuff you mention.
"historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance".
"It's The Iron Law Of Nations" - Houston Stewart Chamberlin, probably
He was asked about illegal immigration. The problem is that there's a different version of the clip, which is edited, has the order he said things mixed up, and has any context about illegal immigration being taken out.
That appears to be the one being shared, and it gives the impression he's talking generally about sending people back to Bangladesh, which is why it's causing such a fuss.
Starmer says he doesn't want to ban politicians betting on politics.....I can see him quango-ing it up, some independent body where you have to register all the bets you have placed.
Oh so Keirs comments seem planned Couldn't say Pakistan because there are too many British Pakistani's in swing seats. Bangladesh is safe as they are fewer of them and concentrated in safer seats. Are they seeing a drift to reform?
Picking Bangladesh to make a point is very stupid, regardless of how things have been edited, there's a large Bangladeshi community in the UK, especially in areas Labour is already starting to struggle - East London, Birmingham etc
Vanilla - the only thing in the known universe more useless than the Department for Education.
I disagree. The Perl programming language would give it a run for its money. The only "write once, never edit" language known.
Perl was write once, make sure it works and then never ever go near it again.
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
It was a thing amongst Perl programmers. They took a perverse delight in writing unreadable code.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv) is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
How many other countries are entitled to invade their neighbours to right a 'historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance' ?
Palestine
We can probably invade france on those grounds
The Treaty of Troyes is all the legal grounds you could want.
All you really have to do is is say you disagree with the last 100 years of developments in international law, resign from the UN, and claim right of conquest. One for the next Reform manifesto.
No need to resign from the UN when you are a peemanent member of the Security Council with a veto.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
I've scrutinised the challenger against the incumbent.
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
Then, that's an OTT emotional and illogical reaction.
And, you'll pay for it.
I just want to be left alone by the government but the blues keep sticking their nose in.
I've got news for you mate: if that's what you want you're voting for the wrong team.
I have news too. Countries have to live with their history. Being left alone by government disappeared as an option some time ago. Once systems are in place basically giving government oversight and financial accountability for health, welfare, social care, education, safety nets, pensions, economic policy, equality, levelling up, ag and fish, regulation, health and safety, social policy, child care, transport, utilities and trade policy then non-interfering government is not an option.
We are about 150 years down that particular track. A serious party whose fundamental policy was based on: individual responsibility, caveat emptor, laisser faire, the family unit as the power centre, minimal government engagement and financial responsibility would be fascinating. It won't happen in my lifetime. probably never.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Stalingrad and Kursk are on the History Channel all the time.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Soviet Union, not Russia. 7 million Ukranians fought the Nazis.
For instance off the top of my head, I’d say seats that are way more likely to go REF than many on that list (and, to be clear, this isn’t a prediction, just a “if Reform did get 18 seats”) positing:
- South Holland and the Deepings - Gainsborough - North West Norfolk - Maldon - Basildon and Billericay
Far, far more likely to fall than seats like Skipton & Ripon and Cotswold North!
I wouldn't be shocked if the Barnsley Doncaster part of South Yorkshire (where I'm from) returned at least one Reform MP.
I think everything will revert to/remain as Labour, although there's been almost nil campaigning.
The Doncaster seat (or its new equivalent) that went to Nick Fletcher last time (previously Caroline Flint) has always contained Tory wards which aren't really going to vote Reform and I don't think there are enough of the Labour -> Boris -> Reform type switchers to make more than a minor dent.
The Sun last night, Sir Philip said, “What’s it go to do with you whether I did or didn’t” place the bet. He added: “I hope to win. I'm busting a gut to win. I expect to lose. In the 2005 election, I busted a gut to win. I expected to lose. I had a bet on myself to lose in the 2005 election, and my bet went down the pan."
That ok that you did it before and lost.....hmmm....do these people not do any PR training?
Its an insurance policy. If he loses his job he gets the payout.
Same as betting on your wife having twins (I knew someone who did that - and won). If you win the bet you get some money to help with the consequence.
Nearly all of us place a bet at long odds that our house will catch fire, after all.
Which is why the Medieval Catholic Church viewed insurance (initially) as gambling.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
I completely agree, but the problem comes when this and other historical grievances are used to justify modern-day aggression
Thanks Andy. I'm changing my vote that is disgusting.
He’s basically saying we shouldn’t send them to Rwanda but instead send them back to where they came from.
Fuck Me its Enoch Starmer Smith.
Good ol Smithy..
More seriously, surely its an out of context clip. If not it is either in the same league as Gordon Browns bigoted woman off camera jibe or it is a none to subtle dog whistle to reform minded voters in Barnsley.
Forgot to add to previous post - @JosiasJessop I would argue that Gorbachev changed the system but not the mentality, especially not the foreign policy mentality
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv) is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
How many other countries are entitled to invade their neighbours to right a 'historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance' ?
Palestine
We can probably invade france on those grounds
The Treaty of Troyes is all the legal grounds you could want.
All you really have to do is is say you disagree with the last 100 years of developments in international law, resign from the UN, and claim right of conquest. One for the next Reform manifesto.
But "Feels Nationalism" trumps all of the stuff you mention.
"historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance".
"It's The Iron Law Of Nations" - Houston Stewart Chamberlin, probably
Surely we just need to shrug and go "but they are french"
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Stalingrad and Kursk are on the History Channel all the time.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
Ask the average Brit about the battle of Stalingrad you will get a blank stare "But its us that won the war we stood alone against the germans mate"
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Stalingrad and Kursk are on the History Channel all the time.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
80th anniversary of Operation Bagration last weekend, didn't even make the news here, a further contender for the most decisive battle on the Eastern Front.
Vanilla - the only thing in the known universe more useless than the Department for Education.
I disagree. The Perl programming language would give it a run for its money. The only "write once, never edit" language known.
Perl was write once, make sure it works and then never ever go near it again.
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
It was a thing amongst Perl programmers. They took a perverse delight in writing unreadable code.
Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Stalingrad and Kursk are on the History Channel all the time.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
Ask the average Brit about the battle of Stalingrad you will get a blank stare "But its us that won the war we stood alone against the germans mate"
The Soviets were on the Nazi side in 39-41 of course.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Stalingrad and Kursk are on the History Channel all the time.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
Ask the average Brit about the battle of Stalingrad you will get a blank stare "But its us that won the war we stood alone against the germans mate"
Stalingrad? You want the Ilfracombe and Barnstaple section. You wouldn't have much fun in Stalingrad.
Vanilla - the only thing in the known universe more useless than the Department for Education.
I disagree. The Perl programming language would give it a run for its money. The only "write once, never edit" language known.
Perl was write once, make sure it works and then never ever go near it again.
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
It was a thing amongst Perl programmers. They took a perverse delight in writing unreadable code.
And I took a perverse delight in telling them to go back and do it properly.
These betting politicians are going to get political betting banned altogether aren't they.
I fully expect more regulation on betting under a Starmer government, all under the guise of protecting the punter.
Yet another reason not to vote Labour methinks. God save us from people who want to protect us from ourselves. CS Lewis was right.
Lewis, from the perspective of now, was an old style conservative who placed freedom and personal responsibility at the centre, was more or less laisser faire about consequences, and believed in minutely small government compared with now.
For all I know he is right, but in practice now he would be on his own. Beveridge, the government of 1945, NHS and all, finished off that world view. No subsequent Tory government has introduced a single old style conservative/old liberal policy since the war.
Vanilla - the only thing in the known universe more useless than the Department for Education.
I disagree. The Perl programming language would give it a run for its money. The only "write once, never edit" language known.
Perl was write once, make sure it works and then never ever go near it again.
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
It was a thing amongst Perl programmers. They took a perverse delight in writing unreadable code.
it depends on what you want to use the code for. some random app or website, make it as unreadable as possible. controlling the engines of an Aircraft in flight, probably best have a design and readable code
Thanks Andy. I'm changing my vote that is disgusting.
He’s basically saying we shouldn’t send them to Rwanda but instead send them back to where they came from.
He wants votes from Reform.
This is all purely performative.
I did wonder about that. Perhaps private polling is telling Labour to be worried about the Reform vote? Nigel is drawing adoring crowds, SKS is drawing yawns?
Vanilla - the only thing in the known universe more useless than the Department for Education.
I disagree. The Perl programming language would give it a run for its money. The only "write once, never edit" language known.
Perl was write once, make sure it works and then never ever go near it again.
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
It was a thing amongst Perl programmers. They took a perverse delight in writing unreadable code.
Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook.
Oh so Keirs comments seem planned Couldn't say Pakistan because there are too many British Pakistani's in swing seats. Bangladesh is safe as they are fewer of them and concentrated in safer seats. Are they seeing a drift to reform?
I'd imagine the reason is that the UK signed a return agreement with Bangladesh just a month ago. The point appears to be that despite this agreement, people won't be removed because the systems/people aren't actually in place to do it.
Not sure it's new either. Labour MPs have been saying for the last few years that where there are straightforward cases of people who have failed asylum or are identified as illegal immigrants, they aren't being dealt with quickly.
Fully costed! It has been said in the debate! Very simple. We borrow more and that is fully costed until we become a banana republic and we do a runner.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
My view, having previously lived in Russia and worked with Russians for many years, is that Russia as a society is totally poisoned by nationalism, imperialism and victim complex, and won't get out of this short of a postwar-Germany-style transformation of how the country thinks. Even a light interrogation of the most liberal Muscovite will result in 'yeah but NATO yeah but America took our credit for WWII' after a bit. With this in mind, a new leader would change precisely bollock
I think the ww2 point is a legitimate one. The russians did much of the heavy lifting during ww2 with deccisive battles at Stalingrad and Kursk and certainly dont get the credit for it in the west.
Stalingrad and Kursk are on the History Channel all the time.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
Ask the average Brit about the battle of Stalingrad you will get a blank stare "But its us that won the war we stood alone against the germans mate"
The Soviets were on the Nazi side in 39-41 of course.
Thanks Andy. I'm changing my vote that is disgusting.
He’s basically saying we shouldn’t send them to Rwanda but instead send them back to where they came from.
He wants votes from Reform.
This is all purely performative.
I did wonder about that. Perhaps private polling is telling Labour to be worried about the Reform vote? Nigel is drawing adoring crowds, SKS is drawing yawns?
Oh so Keirs comments seem planned Couldn't say Pakistan because there are too many British Pakistani's in swing seats. Bangladesh is safe as they are fewer of them and concentrated in safer seats. Are they seeing a drift to reform?
I'd imagine the reason is that the UK signed a return agreement with Bangladesh just a month ago. The point appears to be that despite this agreement, people won't be removed because the systems/people aren't actually in place to do it.
Not sure it's new either. Labour MPs have been saying for the last few years that where there are straightforward cases of people who have failed asylum or are identified as illegal immigrants, they aren't being dealt with quickly.
Thanks Andy. I'm changing my vote that is disgusting.
He’s basically saying we shouldn’t send them to Rwanda but instead send them back to where they came from.
He wants votes from Reform.
This is all purely performative.
I did wonder about that. Perhaps private polling is telling Labour to be worried about the Reform vote? Nigel is drawing adoring crowds, SKS is drawing yawns?
Yes, that's the obvious conclusion to draw.
In which case giving Galloway a huge boost in return for a few reform returners is not very wise.
Oh so Keirs comments seem planned Couldn't say Pakistan because there are too many British Pakistani's in swing seats. Bangladesh is safe as they are fewer of them and concentrated in safer seats. Are they seeing a drift to reform?
There's quite a lot in his own constituency of Holborn and St Pancras.
Happy image from my evening. Victoria Tap, Manchester. Three old ladies. Well dressed old ladies, but dressed like old ladies used to dress: smart floral dresses. Glasses of white wine in front of them. Break off from.their earnest and animated conversation to sing along lustily as tge Zombies' "She's not there" comes on over the speakers. Which I suppose is the same vintage they are, but rather cooler than what you would normally exoect women in their late 70s and 80s be into. Good grief it's late. Then back to their conversation. Clearly Talking Heads doesn't catch their imagination the same way.
Another 0-0 being ground out on the telly. Good grief football is turgid.
i think this is my favourite genre of PB, the little vignettes of PBers’ lives
One of the great things that @MikeSmithson did - and may all good fortune and good wishes go with him - is gather together a spectacularly disparate group of intelligent people. Yes we may verge towards the geeky, but we also verge towards WTAF. We have fabulously eloquent nutters like @Dura_Ace and we also have insanely centrist sensibles like @kle4. More importantly, it gathers in generally civil conversation a bunch of properly smart people with wildly different perspectives and experiences, and thanks to the gentle moderation - kudos to @TSE and @rcs1000 - it remains quite cordial even as it allows vicious rivalries
That’s really hard to achieve. I’m sure we all take different things from this site, but for me one of the most precious is articulate glimpses of other lives, other worlds, like this what you just did
I’ll stop being sentimental now and go back to insulting David Duke of Brexit, the Gaylording Ponceyboots Hisself, Mr Daveyboy “I think I’d be good at it, oops I’m historically terrible” Cameron, but just wanted to get that out there
Comments
The glorious MIC and Norstat have come over the hill to the rescue showing the Cons with over 20% and as many as 100 or even 110 seats. The champagne corks are a-popping in No 10!
I mean, it would be piss funny if it happened, but come on...
One of the great things that @MikeSmithson did - and may all good fortune and good wishes go with him - is gather together a spectacularly disparate group of intelligent people. Yes we may verge towards the geeky, but we also verge towards WTAF. We have fabulously eloquent nutters like @Dura_Ace and we also have insanely centrist sensibles like @kle4. More importantly, it gathers in generally civil conversation a bunch of properly smart people with wildly different perspectives and experiences, and thanks to the gentle moderation - kudos to @TSE and @rcs1000 - it remains quite cordial even as it allows vicious rivalries
That’s really hard to achieve. I’m sure we all take different things from this site, but for me one of the most precious is articulate glimpses of other lives, other worlds, like this what you just did
I’ll stop being sentimental now and go back to insulting David Duke of Brexit, the Gaylording Ponceyboots Hisself, Mr Daveyboy “I think I’d be good at it, oops I’m historically terrible” Cameron, but just wanted to get that out there
More wine!
I remember a Perl expert writing what should have been a 200 line script in a single completely and utterly unreadable line, assembler was easier to read and follow...
That appears to be the one being shared, and it gives the impression he's talking generally about sending people back to Bangladesh, which is why it's causing such a fuss.
"Who cares about SKS's 300-seat majority? The bastard failed to beat the 12.9 m votes the sainted Jeremy achieved in 2017!"
Some nice person (I forget whom) put up the main points on this very board. I was very bored.
Austria to win the Euros is currently trading at around 19. It’s been steadily falling all day from 25 this morning, as people realise that they’ve got a potentially easy route (Turkey and then maybe Romania) to the Semis…where they might face England…who don’t look great themselves currently.
As a trading bet, I expect it to fall further once tonight’s fixtures have concluded, and the hype around Austria’s path goes more and more viral on social media - because we will have the usual images of the full bracket of knockouts - which we don’t have now.
You could cash out tomorrow for a good profit, I think, and then decide to let some run / keep a fraction as you see fit.
They have a pressing style which will be helped by the fact they get a full week off between Tuesday and next Tuesday. More time to rest, whereas teams like England get 2 days fewer rest.
Same as betting on your wife having twins (I knew someone who did that - and won). If you win the bet you get some money to help with the consequence.
Nearly all of us place a bet at long odds that our house will catch fire, after all.
"historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance".
"It's The Iron Law Of Nations" - Houston Stewart Chamberlin, probably
Couldn't say Pakistan because there are too many British Pakistani's in swing seats. Bangladesh is safe as they are fewer of them and concentrated in safer seats. Are they seeing a drift to reform?
We are about 150 years down that particular track. A serious party whose fundamental policy was based on: individual responsibility, caveat emptor, laisser faire, the family unit as the power centre, minimal government engagement and financial responsibility would be fascinating. It won't happen in my lifetime. probably never.
What irks certain Russians is that the propaganda versions get dissected.
The Doncaster seat (or its new equivalent) that went to Nick Fletcher last time (previously Caroline Flint) has always contained Tory wards which aren't really going to vote Reform and I don't think there are enough of the Labour -> Boris -> Reform type switchers to make more than a minor dent.
Barnsley may be different.
Good ol Smithy..
More seriously, surely its an out of context clip. If not it is either in the same league as Gordon Browns bigoted woman off camera jibe or it is a none to subtle dog whistle to reform minded voters in Barnsley.
Galloway will be happy this evening.
“This fleshy, pink smiling face is made from living human skin”
https://x.com/newscientist/status/1805652025125859665?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
"But its us that won the war we stood alone against the germans mate"
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook.
Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook?
Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook.
Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook? Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook. Ook? Ook! Ook! Ook? Ook! Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook.
Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook. Ook.
Ook! Ook. Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook.
Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook! Ook!
Ook! Ook. Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook? Ook. Ook. Ook! Ook.
is valid code in the ook language just saying
This is all purely performative.
Oh, and an honourable mention to ARM assembler - though i don't get to use that much.
And C is certainly not a WORN language if written well. If written poorly, *any* language can be WORN. e.g. in Python:
https://pyobfusc.com/
All these highfalutin new languages are great, but sometimes the oldies are the goldies.
For all I know he is right, but in practice now he would be on his own. Beveridge, the government of 1945, NHS and all, finished off that world view. No subsequent Tory government has introduced a single old style conservative/old liberal policy since the war.
Not sure it's new either. Labour MPs have been saying for the last few years that where there are straightforward cases of people who have failed asylum or are identified as illegal immigrants, they aren't being dealt with quickly.
Keirnocchio.
Change the record !
Are the Tories turning against pensioners now?
It was so dreary.
I am convinced this election is Rishi Sunak playing a game of Brewsters Millions but with Tory seats not greenbacks.