Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Tipping point? – politicalbetting.com

245

Comments

  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    For Boris to enter Parliament, a Tory leader would have to enable it. Since he would obviously be an immediate rival, why would any foreseeable leader do any such thing?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291
    edited January 26
    Foxy said:

    Consider it his wilderness years.

    No, Johnson still nurses delusions of being the second Churchill. I expect that he will appear as a Conservative candidate at the next GE if not before. A desperate Tory party eclipsed by Reform may well choose that poison instead of the ignominy of being third fiddle.
    He won't, CCHQ will block him, Kemi won't allow him on the approved parliamentary candidates list any more than Rishi would even if Cleverly or Jenrick might.

    Remember even on the Election Maps average new voteshares the Tories still actually GAIN 45 seats on 2024 and remain almost 100 MPs more than Reform and a clear second. FPTP very much benefits the Tories and Labour still more than Reform and the LDs too who would also stay 4 MPs more than Reform

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=23.5&LAB=25.9&LIB=12.5&Reform=24&Green=8.3&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613

    Or Cricket?
    If you need a national sport played in white, with arcane rituals nobody else understands, I recommend sumo wrestling. Basically cricket at warp speed.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,919

    Or Cricket?
    Apart from T20I
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,484
    HYUFD said:

    Boris ended EU free movement, Rishi raised wage requirements for visas for non EU immigrants
    Goodness. Sorted then. Hurrah!
  • eekeek Posts: 29,399
    biggles said:

    For Boris to enter Parliament, a Tory leader would have to enable it. Since he would obviously be an immediate rival, why would any foreseeable leader do any such thing?

    Desperate times may call for very desperate measures...
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,298

    This is a major problem for Farage.

    A USA Presidential run can be all about an individual, a UK HoC campaign requires a team with the party leader being only first among equals.

    Who would Reform's Chancellor, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary etc be ?
    It’s no secret Rupert Lowe is the one the Reform activists like. He will be over 70 by the time of the next election but he could easily appeal to what’s left of the Conservative core vote in a way Farage probably can’t.

    I suspect he will, pace Trump, try the tired old schtick of bringing business skills into Government.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,919

    Or Cricket?
    Apart from T20I
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    MJW said:

    It gets to the basic problem the Tories have though, which can be seen if you look at each party's voters view of Trump and Musk. A majority still saying they'll vote Tory hold profoundly negative views of Trump. Reform is the only party whose voters have a net positive view. That correlates with a form of anti-establishment, anti-institutional thinking that views all mainstream politicians and parties as having failed and radical right-wingers as the answer.

    So going down the 'let's be more Reformy' route maybe a dead end - because you can't be the insurgents, you're the Conservative Party and have ruled Britain for two thirds of the last 50 years. And by being more Reform you may lose your remaining institutionalist voters while not gaining much in the way of those who support Reform because they want to smash up the system.

    It still might be a longshot but their best bet might be ditching the populism - which partly damns your selves - and trying to rebrand as an institutionalist alternative to Labour and the Lib Dems with a more right-wing economic bent. Because it's difficult to see how you get your populist 2019 Boris voters back now Reform are a serious rival.
    Right wing policies are not 'Reformy' - they are Tory policies. Reducing immigration to the low tens of thousands was a policy that was central to the manifestos of repeated Conservative election victories, and they repeatedly blew it. The same for reducing taxes, a tough approach to law and order, and shrinking the size of the state. The only reason there is 'an insurgency' is because the Tories have promised these policies, repeatedly failed to deliver.

    I would also argue that the old consensus in politics is dying - look at the way Starmer and Reeves are now scrambling for growth. Why would you want to get on board that sinking ship?

    And that's a problem for the Tories currently - Labour have been terrible but by and large they've continued the policies of the Sunak Government. Net Zero, lax immigration, low growth, high taxes - they have all been accelerated by Labour but they were well underway with the Tories.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,996
    theProle said:

    Forgive my ignorance, but when you get a graph which shows the Tories flat, the LDs flat, the Greens virtually flat, Labour droping like a stone and Reform off like a meteor, what do you think is happening?

    I would be entirely willing to believe Reform were stealing Tory votes except that for them to remain flat they have to gaining votes somewhere. Are you arguing that the Ref increase is all ex-Tory, and being offset in the Tory pot by Lab-> Tory switching?

    Same problem with the Lib-dems, but the other way round - I'd expect some Lab -> Lib switching, but if that's occuring, where are the existing Lib voters going? Ref seems unlikely, but then they are putting on votes from somewhere.

    You would expect Reform to appeal to certain types of Red Wall traditional Labour voters. Working Class, Socially Conservative, not very keen on immigration. IMHO, it's fairly obvious that a lot of these voters will be those who switched to Boris in 2019, returned to Lab in 2024 and are now indicating they will vote Reform. I'd be genuinely fascinated if someone has a coherent alternative analysis, because I honestly can't see one from the information available.
    There are almost always significant voter flows between parties. I was trying to find the most recent chart that was showing this (someone might be able to help here - I can't remember the polling company?), but from memory I think it showed Labour losing votes in all directions, with the Tories gaining some from Lab and them going out the back end to Reform - but with not as big a direct transfer between Lab/Reform as you'd think from just looking at headline polling figures.

    People are odd and quite idiosyncratic.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291

    Right wing policies are not 'Reformy' - they are Tory policies. Reducing immigration to the low tens of thousands was a policy that was central to the manifestos of repeated Conservative election victories, and they repeatedly blew it. The same for reducing taxes, a tough approach to law and order, and shrinking the size of the state. The only reason there is 'an insurgency' is because the Tories have promised these policies, repeatedly failed to deliver.

    I would also argue that the old consensus in politics is dying - look at the way Starmer and Reeves are now scrambling for growth. Why would you want to get on board that sinking ship?

    And that's a problem for the Tories currently - Labour have been terrible but by and large they've continued the policies of the Sunak Government. Net Zero, lax immigration, low growth, high taxes - they have all been accelerated by Labour but they were well underway with the Tories.
    Rishi cut immigration more than Boris to be fair to him and never targeted pensioners, small businesses and farmers like Labour have
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/

    For those interested, some newly published research on public attitudes to immigration. Largely confirms everything you'd expect, from attitudinal divides along age and educational lines, to a substantial uptick in support for migration in specified professions.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,074
    stodge said:

    It’s no secret Rupert Lowe is the one the Reform activists like. He will be over 70 by the time of the next election but he could easily appeal to what’s left of the Conservative core vote in a way Farage probably can’t.

    I suspect he will, pace Trump, try the tired old schtick of bringing business skills into Government.
    Trump benefitted from years of free advertising via The Apprentice, which fed a myth that he was a great businessman. I don't think someone with a regular business background, successful or not, can deliver the same schtick. Look what happened with Romney!
  • biggles said:

    “Permanently”? I genuinely laughed out loud at that.

    Boris makes people lose all their usual critical faculties.

    I recall all the “strange death of Tory England” articles written around 2005 or so, and the last rites for Labour in 2019.
    I am only repeating what the focus groups said.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291
    stodge said:

    It’s no secret Rupert Lowe is the one the Reform activists like. He will be over 70 by the time of the next election but he could easily appeal to what’s left of the Conservative core vote in a way Farage probably can’t.

    I suspect he will, pace Trump, try the tired old schtick of bringing business skills into Government.
    Lowe has no charisma and would lose redwall voters
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,778
    In all seriousness, why don't Labour appoint Boris as US Ambassador? He would be very good at it and he needs the money.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,996

    Trump benefitted from years of free advertising via The Apprentice, which fed a myth that he was a great businessman. I don't think someone with a regular business background, successful or not, can deliver the same schtick. Look what happened with Romney!
    They won't win anything in and around Southampton if Lowe is in a leadership role. About as popular there as John Mr Portsmouth FC Westwood.
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,378
    theProle said:

    Forgive my ignorance, but when you get a graph which shows the Tories flat, the LDs flat, the Greens virtually flat, Labour droping like a stone and Reform off like a meteor, what do you think is happening?

    I would be entirely willing to believe Reform were stealing Tory votes except that for the Tories to then remain flat they have to be gaining votes somewhere. Are you arguing that the Ref increase is all ex-Tory, and being offset in the Tory pot by Lab-> Tory switching?

    Same problem with the Lib-dems, but the other way round - I'd expect some Lab -> Lib switching, but if that's occuring, where are the existing Lib voters going? Ref seems unlikely, but then they are putting on votes from somewhere.

    You would expect Reform to appeal to certain types of Red Wall traditional Labour voters. Working Class, Socially Conservative, not very keen on immigration. IMHO, it's fairly obvious that a lot of these voters will be those who switched to Boris in 2019, returned to Lab in 2024 and are now indicating they will vote Reform. I'd be genuinely fascinated if someone has a coherent alternative analysis, because I honestly can't see one from the information available.
    Labour has lost about 10% of its 2024 vote to Reform, whereas the Tories have lost about 20% to Reform. But it's offset by the fact they have gained some voters back from Labour. Reform also retains a higher percent of its 2024 vote than the main two parties, whereas a good chunk of Labour's is WNV/DK.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,965
    edited January 26
    If Trump puts tariffs on UK exports to the US, we should immediately reciprocate on US imports. We should go further and boycott US goods.

    We need to persuade supermarkets to stop stocking US goods. I don't know which US goods I'll miss most. But I will be in there with the boycott.

    This is hardball.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,919
    The Colombian President folds to Trump in an hour.

    This doesn’t send a great message.

    https://x.com/endwokeness/status/1883601678899016168?s=61
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,074
    viewcode said:

    In all seriousness, why don't Labour appoint Boris as US Ambassador? He would be very good at it and he needs the money.

    An ambassadors' first job is to do what the government says. All these suggestions for US ambassador stunt casting ignore this requirement.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,778
    Taz said:

    The Colombian President folds to Trump in an hour.

    This doesn’t send a great message.

    https://x.com/endwokeness/status/1883601678899016168?s=61

    ...in the end they all kneel...
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,537
    Taz said:

    The Colombian President folds to Trump in an hour.

    This doesn’t send a great message.

    https://x.com/endwokeness/status/1883601678899016168?s=61

    "When you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow." (LBJ)
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    HYUFD said:

    Rishi cut immigration more than Boris to be fair to him and never targeted pensioners, small businesses and farmers like Labour have
    That is not true - there was already a deeply ingrained very anti-farmer/food production policy in the UK. Subsidies for rewilding, cash rewards for leaving the industry etc. - listen to the farmers on the protests, they will laugh if you tell them the anti-farmer stuff started with SKS. Like everything else, it has just accelerated.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,161

    Trump benefitted from years of free advertising via The Apprentice, which fed a myth that he was a great businessman. I don't think someone with a regular business background, successful or not, can deliver the same schtick. Look what happened with Romney!
    This is itself a bit of a myth. Trump's name was synonymous with bling and business long before the Apprentice.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,475

    "When you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow." (LBJ)
    What was their legal position to refuse entry of Columbian citizens to Columbia?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,317
    ohnotnow said:

    The dude reading from the card seems so much more serious. And his trousers reach his ankles. Both of which are plus points in my book for anyone heading up Homeland Security.
    He also seems to have the most enormous feet (wait till the end). I have no idea what that signifies.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644
    Trump expected to visit Britain ‘soon’ after first call with Starmer since inauguration
    Prime Minister becomes first European leader to speak to US president since he was sworn in

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/26/starmer-trump-first-phone-call/ (£££)
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,965

    What was their legal position to refuse entry of Columbian citizens to Columbia?
    The President wanted to be consulted. He didn't want them to be dumped in handcuffs. He's now going to send his presidential plane to pick them up. It's not a total capitulation.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,275

    Trump expected to visit Britain ‘soon’ after first call with Starmer since inauguration
    Prime Minister becomes first European leader to speak to US president since he was sworn in

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/26/starmer-trump-first-phone-call/ (£££)

    They need to get this Labour MP:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Leishman

    to have a round of gold with Trump at his favourite course and then have Trump made a honorary member.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644
    edited January 26

    This is itself a bit of a myth. Trump's name was synonymous with bling and business long before the Apprentice.
    One point TRis Entertainment made is that Trump's background also includes a lot of US "pro sports" and that there were echoes of this in the campaign and also inauguration, with the merch, the red MAGA hats, and even throwing pens into the crowd watching him sign executive orders.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291

    Trump expected to visit Britain ‘soon’ after first call with Starmer since inauguration
    Prime Minister becomes first European leader to speak to US president since he was sworn in

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/26/starmer-trump-first-phone-call/ (£££)

    The rumour is Farage will be taking Trump to Clacton for a heroes welcome in the most MAGA part of the UK
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,919

    I was doing consultancy work for a back row forward who had played for Ospreys and Wasps. He didn't get a cap because of Gatlands Welsh regions rule. He retired about five years ago. He said at the start of his career he would have around 15 collisions a game by the end he reckoned it was about 50 to 60. I can't watch 80 minutes of rolling mauls and gaining yards by weight advantage and a kicking game followed by a maul.

    Back in my school days the scrum won the ball in either a scrum or a maul, got the ball to the scrum half, the scrum half would feed the fly half/ outside half and along the three quarter line. That is the sort of rugby that led to "that try" for the Babas. When I was at school we would play some schools where a big fat kid would be played at scrum half, not for his pace but for his weight. Today's rugby follows that pattern. Rugby League is more of a spectacle these days.

    Association football on the other hand since the seventies has got faster and far more skillful.
    I wonder if that rise in collisions is behind, or a major factor in, the dramatic increase in players ending up with some form of brain damage/early onset dementia.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291

    That is not true - there was already a deeply ingrained very anti-farmer/food production policy in the UK. Subsidies for rewilding, cash rewards for leaving the industry etc. - listen to the farmers on the protests, they will laugh if you tell them the anti-farmer stuff started with SKS. Like everything else, it has just accelerated.
    A bit of rewilding was a drop in the ocean compared to the imposition of 20% IHT on agricultural land over £1 million
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,275

    This is itself a bit of a myth. Trump's name was synonymous with bling and business long before the Apprentice.
    It was but because Trump was better at self-publicizing himself as a businessman than he was at the actual business bit.

    Trump's business was the Trump brand.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,074

    This is itself a bit of a myth. Trump's name was synonymous with bling and business long before the Apprentice.
    I was watching a YouTube video today on Biblical scholarship. This made the distinction between myth as stories involving the Gods and legend, fictional events that happened to a real person. So, really, neither of us should be talking about myths here. They're legends.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291
    Barnesian said:

    If Trump puts tariffs on UK exports to the US, we should immediately reciprocate on US imports. We should go further and boycott US goods.

    We need to persuade supermarkets to stop stocking US goods. I don't know which US goods I'll miss most. But I will be in there with the boycott.

    This is hardball.

    The US has a trade surplus with us, it will be hitting China, Canada, Mexico and the EU with whom it has a deficit before it gets to us
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,074

    It was but because Trump was better at self-publicizing himself as a businessman than he was at the actual business bit.

    Trump's business was the Trump brand.
    Despite six bankruptcies.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    There's always a tweet:


  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,110
    Is it just me or is there some kind of weird love-in between Trump and Starmer.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,965
    HYUFD said:

    The US has a trade surplus with us, it will be hitting China, Canada, Mexico and the EU with whom it has a deficit before it gets to us
    They should do the same. Boycott US goods and source them from elsewhere. Probably from China.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644
    HYUFD said:

    The rumour is Farage will be taking Trump to Clacton for a heroes welcome in the most MAGA part of the UK
    Donald Trump nearly stood as the Reform Party's presidential candidate and I wonder if it is this coincidence in names that eased the relationship between Trump and Farage. (The American one had been founded by Ross Perot.)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_2000_presidential_campaign
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,285
    edited January 26

    There's always a tweet:


    David Cameron was right, and this lot seem to have dialled it to 11 with their opportunistic tweets while in opposition.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,448

    There's always a tweet:


    Yeah but his own VP compared Trump to Hitler.

    Trump is very forgiving of those who brown nose him. He enjoys their public humiliation.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,765
    edited January 26
    theProle said:

    Forgive my ignorance, but when you get a graph which shows the Tories flat, the LDs flat, the Greens virtually flat, Labour droping like a stone and Reform off like a meteor, what do you think is happening?

    I would be entirely willing to believe Reform were stealing Tory votes except that for the Tories to then remain flat they have to be gaining votes somewhere. Are you arguing that the Ref increase is all ex-Tory, and being offset in the Tory pot by Lab-> Tory switching?

    Same problem with the Lib-dems, but the other way round - I'd expect some Lab -> Lib switching, but if that's occuring, where are the existing Lib voters going? Ref seems unlikely, but then they are putting on votes from somewhere.

    You would expect Reform to appeal to certain types of Red Wall traditional Labour voters. Working Class, Socially Conservative, not very keen on immigration. IMHO, it's fairly obvious that a lot of these voters will be those who switched to Boris in 2019, returned to Lab in 2024 and are now indicating they will vote Reform. I'd be genuinely fascinated if someone has a coherent alternative analysis, because I honestly can't see one from the information available.
    The key thing to remember is that's it's a percentage of people with a voting intention. So Labour's collapse could have seen the Conservatives percentage share increase, even if the total number of people saying they would vote has Conservative has stayed the same.

    Here's a very rough Sankey diagram of the YouGov poll. The bit in orange is excluded from the headline voting intentions, hence the result:


  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,298

    There's always a tweet:


    To be honest, so what?

    Are we saying no one is ever allowed to change their mind or hold a different opinion because of something they put on social media five or ten years ago?

    If all some people have to do is trawl back through years of tweets, fine, but, again, so what? Trump’s take on Starmer has probably changed from when he was an opposition candidate to becoming President again.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291

    Donald Trump nearly stood as the Reform Party's presidential candidate and I wonder if it is this coincidence in names that eased the relationship between Trump and Farage. (The American one had been founded by Ross Perot.)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_2000_presidential_campaign
    Plus Farage also took the Canadian Reform Party's name too deliberately after they overtook the Canadian Tories in the 1990s
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,585

    It was but because Trump was better at self-publicizing himself as a businessman than he was at the actual business bit.

    Trump's business was the Trump brand.
    Where does Deutsche Bank and the Russian Oligarchs fit in?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459

    Is it just me or is there some kind of weird love-in between Trump and Starmer.

    I don’t think there is. But Starmer is observing the niceties in a Starmerish way and Trump, for now - presumably based on some sort of eagerness to have another state visit - is playing nice.
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,743
    edited January 26

    Is it just me or is there some kind of weird love-in between Trump and Starmer.

    Either he wants something or has received something. I suppose we'll find out in 20 years.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    HYUFD said:

    A bit of rewilding was a drop in the ocean compared to the imposition of 20% IHT on agricultural land over £1 million
    It wasn't 'a bit of rewilding' it was a broad suite of policies seemingly designed to sweep farmers off the land, reducing the food supply. There have been mass agricultural protests in The Netherlands and elsewhere in Europe - they didn't have Starmer changing inheritance tax. Starmer's intervention is the latest and worst of a general policy trend that was in progress long before he gained power.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,765
    Eabhal said:

    The key thing to remember is that's it's a percentage of people with a voting intention. So Labour's collapse could have seen the Conservatives percentage share increase, even if the total number of people saying they would vote has Conservative has stayed the same.

    Here's a very rough Sankey diagram of the YouGov poll. The bit in orange is excluded from the headline voting intentions, hence the result:


    @theProle I think you are nearly right about this bit: Socially Conservative, not very keen on immigration. IMHO, it's fairly obvious that a lot of these voters will be those who switched to Boris in 2019, returned to Lab in 2024 and are now indicating they will vote Reform.

    But I don't think these voters ever returned to Labour. They were Reform's voters in '24, and will continue to be.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,415
    HYUFD said:

    The rumour is Farage will be taking Trump to Clacton for a heroes welcome in the most MAGA part of the UK
    Good. Once Trump’s seen Clacton, he’ll no longer want to invade us.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459
    stodge said:

    As an aside, with Rwandan troops apparently set to invade Congo in support of the M23 militia’s push on Goma, I wonder whether we’ll see any action from the new US administration (presumably once they’ve worked out where Rwanda, Congo and Goma are).

    I’m also wondering whether those who hailed Rwanda as a “safe place” to send UK illegal migrants still hold that view.

    As it happens my parents were relaying to me just now a story their Iranian refugee friend (they volunteer down the local reception centre) had told them about meeting an asylum seeker from Rwanda at the centre and quizzing him on how he could be seeking asylum from such an officially safe country.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,285
    stodge said:

    To be honest, so what?

    Are we saying no one is ever allowed to change their mind or hold a different opinion because of something they put on social media five or ten years ago?

    If all some people have to do is trawl back through years of tweets, fine, but, again, so what? Trump’s take on Starmer has probably changed from when he was an opposition candidate to becoming President again.
    So what has changed with Trump over the last five years that means his endorsement is now not reprehensible?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 22,110
    Starmer thanked Trump for his condolences on the death of his brother. This doesn’t sound like Trump!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644
    edited January 26
    Message in yellow chalk on sidewalk in all caps, "First they came for immigrants, inspectors general, transgender people, DEI, scientists, women, poor people and intellectuals.
    --and it's only Saturday of week one."

    https://bsky.app/profile/wutangforchildren.bsky.social/post/3lglo6cgges2i
    (photo of pavement graffiti in Blue Sky tweet equivalent)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,448
    stodge said:

    As an aside, with Rwandan troops apparently set to invade Congo in support of the M23 militia’s push on Goma, I wonder whether we’ll see any action from the new US administration (presumably once they’ve worked out where Rwanda, Congo and Goma are).

    I’m also wondering whether those who hailed Rwanda as a “safe place” to send UK illegal migrants still hold that view.

    To be fair, that fighting is not in Rwanda, it's in the Eastern Congo.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    TimS said:

    As it happens my parents were relaying to me just now a story their Iranian refugee friend (they volunteer down the local reception centre) had told them about meeting an asylum seeker from Rwanda at the centre and quizzing him on how he could be seeking asylum from such an officially safe country.
    He was probably an economic migrant.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459
    edited January 26

    It wasn't 'a bit of rewilding' it was a broad suite of policies seemingly designed to sweep farmers off the land, reducing the food supply. There have been mass agricultural protests in The Netherlands and elsewhere in Europe - they didn't have Starmer changing inheritance tax. Starmer's intervention is the latest and worst of a general policy trend that was in progress long before he gained power.
    Rewilding isn’t always forced by policy, sometimes it’s initiated by farmers themselves. Or in the case of the rapidly “rewilding” scrubland above my vineyard, it’s caused by the absentee landowner who lives in NZ putting a plot up for sale at an unrealistically high price and leaving it unsold and unmanaged for coming on 5 years. Which makes it a great home for the herd of red deer who like to come and nibble my vines from time to time. I was hoping the IHT change might have encouraged him to hurry up but seemingly not so far.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,919

    Good. Once Trump’s seen Clacton, he’ll no longer want to invade us.
    Put him up for the night in a holiday home in Jaywick.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,585
    RobD said:

    So what has changed with Trump over the last five years that means his endorsement is now not reprehensible?
    He became the most powerful man in the Western World.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    TimS said:

    Rewilding isn’t always forced by policy, sometimes it’s initiated by farmers themselves. Or in the case of the rapidly “rewilding” scrubland above my vineyard, it’s caused by the absentee landowner who lives in NZ putting a plot up for sale at an unrealistically high price and leaving it unsold and unmanaged for coming on 5 years. Which makes it a great home for the herd of red deer who like to come and nibble my vines from time to time. I was hoping the IHT change might have encouraged him to hurry up but seemingly not so far.
    How much of it would we see if it weren't subsidised? I would suggest not a lot.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459

    He was probably an economic migrant.
    He’s claiming asylum. He may not succeed of course, though there is pretty widespread political persecution under Kagame.

    Most refugees are fleeing something bad, but they’re also hoping for a better life and opportunities. Just human nature.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,285

    He became the most powerful man in the Western World.
    He was at the time of the tweet.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    TimS said:

    He’s claiming asylum. He may not succeed of course, though there is pretty widespread political persecution under Kagame.

    Most refugees are fleeing something bad, but they’re also hoping for a better life and opportunities. Just human nature.
    Many economic migrants do.

    I'm not making a moral judgement about that, just a reasonably logical surmise.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459
    Taz said:

    Put him up for the night in a holiday home in Jaywick.
    Jaywick always struck me as the most Northern name for a Southern settlement. Proper Viking.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,585
    edited January 26

    Starmer thanked Trump for his condolences on the death of his brother. This doesn’t sound like Trump!

    Perhaps Musk tipped Trump off...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,585
    RobD said:

    He was at the time of the tweet.
    ...and Starmer subsequently became the second...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,161

    Good. Once Trump’s seen Clacton, he’ll no longer want to invade us.
    This is the man who looks at North Korea and sees the potential for condo development.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 850
    Taz said:

    I wonder if that rise in collisions is behind, or a major factor in, the dramatic increase in players ending up with some form of brain damage/early onset dementia.
    I didn't think there was any doubt?
    Heavier, more athletic players > more frequent and harder collisions > more concussions > degenerative brain injury

    Though even in very low level school rugby with pisspoor refereeing, playing tighthead I was head butted almost unconscious by the opposition second row.
    Despite enjoying running rugby (that we see so infrequently these days), I'm glad my kids have shown no interest in playing. My only worry is the progression of field hockey towards hurling, with the governing body happy to see the ball not just being played at head-height but struck at head-height. Just hope they see sense before there is significant evidence of the danger they've allowed into the game.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,285
    edited January 26

    ...and Starmer subsequently became the second...
    That doesn’t really change how desirable an endorsement from Trump would be. If anything, you’d think after the last five years an endorsement would be even less desirable!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644
    Trump EO to abolish FEMA
    Federal Emergency MANAGEMENT agency

    3-RED states TOOK $3 BILLION in Federal FEMA funds
    TEXAS
    LOUISIANA
    FLORIDA
    Now these states can fund themselves
    Higher taxes ~ Oh wait Texas and Florida have ZERO STATE TAXES, now....

    https://x.com/MomSkelton/status/1883560669196476513

    Will Trump reverse ferret as it becomes known Republican states are the largest beneficiaries of Federal emergency aid?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459
    edited January 26

    Many economic migrants do.

    I'm not making a moral judgement about that, just a reasonably logical surmise.
    Their Iranian on the other hand was full-on fleeing persecution. Imprisoned by the regime, released then beaten up, another trial coming up (for apostasy), so got out, and arrived here with family on a small boat via Turkey then Europe - in the UK because extended family are in Britain and he had studied at a university here.

    His family now have refugee status and can finally settle, find a house and job etc.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,686

    Perhaps Musk tipped Trump off...
    Susie Wiles is keeping the train on the track as best she can I suspect.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,212
    TimS said:

    Their Iranian on the other hand was full-on fleeing persecution. Imprisoned by the regime, released then beaten up, another trial coming up (for apostasy), so got out, and arrived here with family on a small boat via Turkey then Europe - in the UK because extended family are in Britain and he had studied at a university here.

    His family now have refugee status and can finally settle, find a house and job etc.
    Good for him. Iranians are very nice people in my experience.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459

    Trump EO to abolish FEMA
    Federal Emergency MANAGEMENT agency

    3-RED states TOOK $3 BILLION in Federal FEMA funds
    TEXAS
    LOUISIANA
    FLORIDA
    Now these states can fund themselves
    Higher taxes ~ Oh wait Texas and Florida have ZERO STATE TAXES, now....

    https://x.com/MomSkelton/status/1883560669196476513

    Will Trump reverse ferret as it becomes known Republican states are the largest beneficiaries of Federal emergency aid?

    Not surprising when red states circle the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean hurricane landfall coasts.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,915
    Just noticed that the Bluesky logo is similar to the old Twitter logo.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    HYUFD said:

    A bit of rewilding was a drop in the ocean compared to the imposition of 20% IHT on agricultural land over £1 million
    Only 20%. The rest of us should be so lucky.

    What we need are policies to support farming - not perpetuate the landowner tax fiddle.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644
    Dopermean said:

    I didn't think there was any doubt?
    Heavier, more athletic players > more frequent and harder collisions > more concussions > degenerative brain injury

    Though even in very low level school rugby with pisspoor refereeing, playing tighthead I was head butted almost unconscious by the opposition second row.
    Despite enjoying running rugby (that we see so infrequently these days), I'm glad my kids have shown no interest in playing. My only worry is the progression of field hockey towards hurling, with the governing body happy to see the ball not just being played at head-height but struck at head-height. Just hope they see sense before there is significant evidence of the danger they've allowed into the game.
    I'd want to see figures. It is just as plausible that more collisions leads to more joint injuries and arthritis, for instance, and that brain damage is more to do with better diagnostic techniques and the secular rise in dementia. It might be that American football, basically rugby with padding, which allows even more collisions, leads the way.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,585
    RobD said:

    That doesn’t really change how desirable an endorsement from Trump would be. If anything, you’d think after the last five years an endorsement would be even less desirable!
    On that I would have to agree. Starmer's problem he has to work with Trump whether he likes it or not. Piss Trump off and Musk replaces Starmer with Yaxley-Lennon.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,285
    edited January 26

    Trump EO to abolish FEMA
    Federal Emergency MANAGEMENT agency

    3-RED states TOOK $3 BILLION in Federal FEMA funds
    TEXAS
    LOUISIANA
    FLORIDA
    Now these states can fund themselves
    Higher taxes ~ Oh wait Texas and Florida have ZERO STATE TAXES, now....

    https://x.com/MomSkelton/status/1883560669196476513

    Will Trump reverse ferret as it becomes known Republican states are the largest beneficiaries of Federal emergency aid?

    Except that he said the money would still come, it would just be managed by the states:

    Trump accused FEMA of bungling emergency relief efforts there and said he preferred that states be given federal money to handle disasters themselves.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/head-disaster-relief-agency-fema-reassures-staff-after-trump-criticism-2025-01-26/
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459
    RobD said:

    That doesn’t really change how desirable an endorsement from Trump would be. If anything, you’d think after the last five years an endorsement would be even less desirable!
    Unfortunately I think the world is in the throes of shock at the moment and most are just hoping the new president won’t lash out at them. Rather pathetic really, but it seems to be happening domestically in the US too.

    The only leaders who aren’t remotely worried seem to be Putin, Modi, Erdogan, Orban, Bibi, Luka and the rest of the merry band of brothers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,062

    Trump EO to abolish FEMA
    Federal Emergency MANAGEMENT agency

    3-RED states TOOK $3 BILLION in Federal FEMA funds
    TEXAS
    LOUISIANA
    FLORIDA
    Now these states can fund themselves
    Higher taxes ~ Oh wait Texas and Florida have ZERO STATE TAXES, now....

    https://x.com/MomSkelton/status/1883560669196476513

    Will Trump reverse ferret as it becomes known Republican states are the largest beneficiaries of Federal emergency aid?

    I feel like he'd be happy to fund them, so long as it was under his direct control somehow rather than an agency which presumably has at least some rules on how to apportion the money. Then he could really use it to browbeat any states he did not like.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291
    Carnyx said:

    Only 20%. The rest of us should be so lucky.

    What we need are policies to support farming - not perpetuate the landowner tax fiddle.
    Crap, the average farmer earns little more than average salary, taxing their farmland too is just going to devastate our food producers
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,285

    On that I would have to agree. Starmer's problem he has to work with Trump whether he likes it or not. Piss Trump off and Musk replaces Starmer with Yaxley-Lennon.
    Which brings us back to my original point about how opportunistic these sort of tweets are. See also commitments made to WASPI campaigners. Entirely unserious.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,644

    Susie Wiles is keeping the train on the track as best she can I suspect.
    It would be interesting to see who is working hard on our side, the ambassador, likely successor Peter Mandelson, or David Lammy.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,195

    I was watching a YouTube video today on Biblical scholarship. This made the distinction between myth as stories involving the Gods and legend, fictional events that happened to a real person. So, really, neither of us should be talking about myths here. They're legends.
    Star Wars Canon or Star Wars Legends?
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,996

    Right wing policies are not 'Reformy' - they are Tory policies. Reducing immigration to the low tens of thousands was a policy that was central to the manifestos of repeated Conservative election victories, and they repeatedly blew it. The same for reducing taxes, a tough approach to law and order, and shrinking the size of the state. The only reason there is 'an insurgency' is because the Tories have promised these policies, repeatedly failed to deliver.

    I would also argue that the old consensus in politics is dying - look at the way Starmer and Reeves are now scrambling for growth. Why would you want to get on board that sinking ship?

    And that's a problem for the Tories currently - Labour have been terrible but by and large they've continued the policies of the Sunak Government. Net Zero, lax immigration, low growth, high taxes - they have all been accelerated by Labour but they were well underway with the Tories.
    You sort of answer my question there by admitting they promised those policies but failed to deliver, if you have a think about *why* they failed to deliver.

    To take immigration. They couldn't meet their promises on immigration because they couldn't do while pursuing their other policy goals - like deficit reduction, sound money or lower taxes. The dirty secret in recent years is that even while making hardline promises on immigration, the treasury's figures were predicated on it remaining very high.

    People who knew how the immigration system works pointed this out when Cameron made the '10s of 1000s' pledge way back when. It was impossible to do so without leaving the EU and then fundamentally rethinking our economic and social models, plus quite possibly ripping up obligations under treaties that underpin lots of stuff the Tories in theory support.

    You'd have to be willing to let lots of universities go bust, vastly increase tuition fees, or provide central government funding - meaning raising taxes or borrowing. You'd have to bolster social care funding so that it became a much more attractive career choice and be willing to tell employers that labour market shortages are tough. And allow staffing shortages in the NHS until we could train more doctors.

    Now that's not to say you can't get immigration down to the 10s of 1000s - as they promised - but you have to be willing to make some of those trade-offs, and fundamentally the Tories were and maybe still are, a party that believes in institutions first even while making promises they knew they couldn't keep without making trade offs they were unwilling to make as it would've harmed other goals. They tried to have their populist cake and eat it and came out very sick.

    Being more 'Reformy' is that Reform are an insurgent party who either deny such trade-offs exist, or are worth making above all else. They are populists who claimed at the last election you could cut taxes by £90 billion, have new spending commitments of £50 billion and that this could all be paid for with £150 billion, mostly from cutting unspecified 'waste'. All the while cutting net migration to a level economic orthodoxy states would harm the economy, at least in the short run (and having to deal with some of the above issues).

    They can promise all that because have a conspiracist theory of the case, that the assumptions and institutions that underpin our government, economic, and social model are wrong and that the only reason are kept to is the malevolence or incompetence of the political class.

    So the Tories have a choice - do they remain institutionalist, in which case Reform will always be able to outbid them and voters would be right to mistrust them when they make right-wing populist promises? So will need to get serious and reintergrate with reality.

    Or do they buy into the right populist case that institutions are so rotten they need smashing up a la what Trump wants to do in the US?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,915

    Or Cricket?
    Cricket is the most exciting sport there is, followed by tennis.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,459
    HYUFD said:

    Crap, the average farmer earns little more than average salary, taxing their farmland too is just going to devastate our food producers
    IHT is on death. If a farmer gifts land 7 years or before dying it’s exempt. So let’s not go overboard on this.

    However, it’s a bit of a half-baked reform that has created some collateral damage. There are various ways it could be tightened up. One would be a requirement that the landowner has their permanent residence on the farm. The other that their income is from farming, not rental from tenants. And so on.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    HYUFD said:

    Crap, the average farmer earns little more than average salary, taxing their farmland too is just going to devastate our food producers
    You're maliciously conflating farming with landownership. As always.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,195

    "When you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow." (LBJ)
    "Berlin is the Testicles of the West. Whenever I want the West to scream, I squeeze on Berlin!" - Krushchev.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,585
    Andy_JS said:

    Cricket is the most exciting sport there is, followed by tennis.
    The Hundred?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,291
    Carnyx said:

    You're maliciously conflating farming with landownership. As always.
    The imposition of 20% inheritance tax on land previously covered by agricultural property relief of course primarily hits farmers that is why
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    edited January 26
    TimS said:

    IHT is on death. If a farmer gifts land 7 years or before dying it’s exempt. So let’s not go overboard on this.

    However, it’s a bit of a half-baked reform that has created some collateral damage. There are various ways it could be tightened up. One would be a requirement that the landowner has their permanent residence on the farm. The other that their income is from farming, not rental from tenants. And so on.
    Quite so.

    I'd rather see the IHT reforms, and proper support for farming done separately (some perhaps in the way you suggest). Not left as a huge subsidy scheme for tax-minimisers.. If Jeremy Clarkson can come out and admit it on prime TV ...
    HYUFD said:

    The imposition of 20% inheritance tax on land previously covered by agricultural property relief of course primarily hits farmers that is why
    No, it does not. It hits landowners primarily.
This discussion has been closed.