What Brits think about the Big Mac eating surrender monkey's plans for Ukraine politicalbetting.com
Do you think a peace treaty negotiated between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on the Ukraine conflict would be better for Ukraine or better for Russia?Better for Russia than Ukraine: 51%More of a compromise for both sides: 23%Better for Ukraine than Russia: 5%yougov.co.uk/topics/polit…
Comments
-
Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.0
-
I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night0 -
FPT: Did the Guardian intend that double "stunned" meaning? (Whether or not they did, it's still funny.)0
-
Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe1 -
I am back Monday evening.eek said:I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night
But I’ve got some prepared threads ready to be deployed.0 -
He'll have withdrawn them by then.TheScreamingEagles said:
I am back Monday evening.eek said:I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night
But I’ve got some prepared threads ready to be deployed.0 -
So will there be a political scalp or won’t there be while you’re off watching Radiohead and eating Hawaiian Pizzas ?TheScreamingEagles said:
I am back Monday evening.eek said:I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night
But I’ve got some prepared threads ready to be deployed.0 -
Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)0 -
Reform giving in to Russia.0
-
No it was me mistranscribing because I was simultaneously watching “Mussolini”’ reading news,Jim_Miller said:FPT: Did the Guardian intend that double "stunned" meaning? (Whether or not they did, it's still funny.)
sending emails and posting on here
0 -
I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.Andy_JS said:Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe
I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.
But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.1 -
Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.CharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)8 -
If the police made that assertion at the Licencing Hearing then it needs to be appealed right away. They had deliberately inverted the rule. Quite frankly any officer making that assertion and his Line Manager need to be sacked. But then that is Keir Starmer's UK, Cart, Horse arseways aroundCharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)4 -
This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.2
-
Or Rachel Reeves is fired. Here's hoping.eek said:I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night0 -
How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?bigjohnowls said:
As Topping says so whatMarqueeMark said:
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...TOPPING said:
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).MarqueeMark said:
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.TOPPING said:
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:Richard_Tyndall said:
'Supporting' is not just analysis.TOPPING said:
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.Leon said:
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?Foxy said:
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.Malmesbury said:
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.Andy_JS said:Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
They have lost and will be giving up land
They will be repaying America via mineral rights.
Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945
As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.
It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.
Zelensky will be fine mind
Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.1 -
My picture ration
Valentine’s Day, evening, Bangkok, tonight
What makes this temporary collection of roses, perfumes, love hearts, pink cuddly toys with I LOVE YOU embroidery is that it is right outside Nana Plaza, Bangkok’s largest complex of brothels1 -
You mean, not like the newspapers and pols went to town on Lucy Letby when she was convicted (and during the trial)? You're not allowed to deploy like political pressure in return?numbertwelve said:
I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.Andy_JS said:Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe
I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.
But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
I must say I don't know what the answer is to that - or whether she really is innocent - but I've read enough about courts in general and this case in particular to get rather uncomfortable about any sort of trial with elaborate stats and no defence.
Did she have legal aid? In which case, no money for decent defence witnesses.
But the media have something to be blamed for, as it appears no specialists wanted to get the pediatrician/paedo treatment fromt he media (and, presumablyt, the local vigilantes).
https://www.bmj.com/content/388/bmj.r3001 -
So is his wifeTaz said:1 -
Corbyistas are comfortable with murderous Russian fascists because they are anti-West and are therefore to be cheered on.Mexicanpete said:
How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?bigjohnowls said:
As Topping says so whatMarqueeMark said:
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...TOPPING said:
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).MarqueeMark said:
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.TOPPING said:
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:Richard_Tyndall said:
'Supporting' is not just analysis.TOPPING said:
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.Leon said:
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?Foxy said:
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.Malmesbury said:
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.Andy_JS said:Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
They have lost and will be giving up land
They will be repaying America via mineral rights.
Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945
As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.
It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.
Zelensky will be fine mind
Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.1 -
The answer to the above is clearly Something Else.
It isn't Brits dying to fight off the Russian invasion. It's not our job to "advise" Ukraine on what to do. It is to stand by them for as long as they wish to fight.6 -
FPT…
It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?CharlieShark said:
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.david_herdson said:
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.CharlieShark said:
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?david_herdson said:
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.JosiasJessop said:
Then they will never form a majority government.Andy_JS said:
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.JosiasJessop said:
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.JohnO said:The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.0 -
fpt
Ah that makes perfect sense.Leon said:
You need to read the online edition. Or listen to the podcasts. Or watch spectator tv. Or check its other digital offeringsTOPPING said:
Speaking of which, I had occasion yesterday to read the Speccie from cover to cover. I mean I can't argue with the circulation stats or perhaps even the readership demographic but god it was turgid and nothing seems to have changed since years ago. The same bitter, I miss the 1950s when people knew their place article by Charles Moore at the front, a why oh why from the otherwise excellent Douglas Murray, and in general still a retail offer to retired colonels and parish councillors.Leon said:
Eia eia alala!EPG said:
He's ordering Europe to let neo-Nazis into government, so of course you'd like him.Leon said:SUPERB speech by Vance in Munich
The Guardian says “he left the room stunned”
Many thanks to @Theuniondivvie for suggesting Sky Atlantic’s Mussolini. Unusual but good. And timely
I didn't get the young, bright, snappy, relevant element that is bringing droves of young people to the mag.
The actual magazine is aimed specifically at the older and ageing readership that still reads paper magazines
I also read Private Eye and was underwhelmed, not taking away their campaigns which are or can be I know super-effective.0 -
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.0 -
Yes, the Met were a paragon of virtue and good sense before Starmer took over.A_View_From_Cumbria5 said:
If the police made that assertion at the Licencing Hearing then it needs to be appealed right away. They had deliberately inverted the rule. Quite frankly any officer making that assertion and his Line Manager need to be sacked. But then that is Keir Starmer's UK, Cart, Horse arseways aroundCharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)0 -
The polling in the header demonstrates (again) that the split in politics is between populists (Reform UK) and everyone else.1
-
Amen brother.rcs1000 said:
Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.CharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)0 -
Isn’t Radiohead in a way just a modern form of jazz?rcs1000 said:
Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.CharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)0 -
You haven’t won the culture war just because you say you have. We’ll see what the lay of the land is after Trump has coated us all in the brown stuff. Trump won by only a few % remember.williamglenn said:
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
And a No Deal Hard Brexit didn’t happen and thank god for that.1 -
I’m perplexed by the idea that anyone things getting rid of her would change anything - all she’s doing is select from options given by the treasury - that needs to be fixedNigel_Foremain said:
Or Rachel Reeves is fired. Here's hoping.eek said:I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night1 -
Were you not one of the people indulging in the wall-to-wall mockery when you were an EU federalist before you hit yourself on the head or whatever caused such an astonishing political volte face, and you became a slobbering MAGA apologist and enthusiastic Brexit loon?williamglenn said:
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.5 -
What's wrong with jazz?rcs1000 said:
Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.CharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)1 -
Comprehensively? Or maybe you meant comprehensibly? Could be both, I guess.williamglenn said:
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.0 -
One of those polls where Reform voters are in a massively different place to Conservative voters, who are actually pretty close to LibLab opinion.2
-
The economist always takes the midwit intelligentsia view, so I guess “Letby’s conviction is unsafe” is now UK mainstream opinion in the London dinner party set.Andy_JS said:Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe0 -
Or, to put it another way, not all (or even most) Reform voters are Putin sympathisers, but it is the Putin sympathisers' party of choice. I wonder why that is?bondegezou said:The polling in the header demonstrates (again) that the split in politics is between populists (Reform UK) and everyone else.
0 -
She is a liar and a lightweight. There needs to be consequences for the former if not for the latter. The BBC suggests that she is also possibly an expenses fraudster. Someone needs to find out if/why her previous employer agreed a compromise agreement with her and what else was covered up. When someone lies on their CV (and whatever anyone says they were lies) it nearly always goes with a dishonest track record. It is why lying on a CV is considered gross misconduct by most employers.eek said:
I’m perplexed by the idea that anyone things getting rid of her would change anything - all she’s doing is select from options given by the treasury - that needs to be fixedNigel_Foremain said:
Or Rachel Reeves is fired. Here's hoping.eek said:I’m correct in saying that TSE is away until Tuesday.
That means Trump is going to announce 20-50% tariffs on the Uk on Sunday night
She is fundamentally not suitable to hold the position she is in, in the same way as Boris Johnson was unsuitable to be PM.0 -
Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column1 -
Even amongst Reform voters there’s a clear majority in favour of continuing to arm Ukraine if Ukrainians choose to continue the fight.Stuartinromford said:One of those polls where Reform voters are in a massively different place to Conservative voters, who are actually pretty close to LibLab opinion.
(Personally, I think this is Ukraine’s choice to make, and we should support whichever choice they make.)6 -
Very off-topic, but 4pm on a Friday is when my next YouTube video goes out. And I've had a phenomenal week. Earned as much in 7 days as I did in January as a whole. Added more than a 1,000 new subscribers. Had an interesting approach from a potential new sponsor.
Sometimes feels like I am a slave to the algorithm but other times it just clicks and things surge forward. I've also built up a bank of material for the coming weeks - next 2 weeks are mostly edited, the week after is shot, I've got a stack of other ideas to pull together and more road trips planned.
It's very much my secondary business activity, but of the 4 I have this is the most fun.8 -
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column2 -
Your last paragraph isn’t right. Yes some, maybe even up to 40% of Reform voters are in the Trump column, but that leaves a majority not, even within Reform.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column0 -
Or very much in the "Sovereignty for us, not for other people!" column.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column4 -
Dunno, diffcult to comprehend that the US electorate voted the creature in twice (or 3 times if you believe the creature).Northern_Al said:
Comprehensively? Or maybe you meant comprehensibly? Could be both, I guess.williamglenn said:
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.1 -
Yes it's a typo.Northern_Al said:
Comprehensively? Or maybe you meant comprehensibly? Could be both, I guess.williamglenn said:
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.
0 -
Good (and important) question. The hypothesis I'd like to test is that it's an unhealthy media diet making their brains rot.pigeon said:
Or, to put it another way, not all (or even most) Reform voters are Putin sympathisers, but it is the Putin sympathisers' party of choice. I wonder why that is?bondegezou said:The polling in the header demonstrates (again) that the split in politics is between populists (Reform UK) and everyone else.
In which case, the UK isn't totally safe, but is in a safer place than the USA.0 -
Reform voters tend to be low information voters. They don't know much about the detail of how the world works and they don't care - they just want things to be good for them and their own.
TBH there's something refreshing about that - if we're honest with ourselves many of us think we are more knowledgeable about some stuff than we actually are. Good at saying things that are plausible even if they aren't actual.
People expressing a view about how a Trump/Putin deal will be good for Putin. Perhaps. Perhaps not. We have no detail about what the deal might be. Not even any broad outlines of it. So all we're doing is letting our prejudices run wild and imagine what a deal might look like from two people we don't have a good opinion of. We are low information on this subject, no different to anyone else.2 -
There was an article in Guardian (yes, I know) earlier this week by Neena Modi, Professor of Neonatal medicine at Imperial College and past president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, in which she sets out her concern, notably that Countess of Chester wasn't equipped or staffed to deal with really seriously ill babies, and some at least of these children had been identified as such before their mothers went into labour.numbertwelve said:
I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.Andy_JS said:Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe
I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.
But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.0 -
Off topic, but inportant: How serious is the current flu outbreak? This serious:
"Influenza levels in the United States are the highest they’ve been in 15 years as winter weather persists and the second wave of the virus causes more and more infections, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
The most recent CDC Weekly U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report shows that 7.8% of visits to a healthcare provider were for respiratory illness, the worst since the swine flu pandemic in late 2009. According to the report, most flu statistics in the U.S. are trending up, including the positive flu infections (31.6%), the patients admitted to hospitals with the flu this week (48,661), and the number of deaths attributed to the flu this week (2%)."
source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/02/11/flu-influenza-cases-increase-2025-symptoms-cdc/78412536007/
Fortunately we now have an HHS secretary — and president — who are uniquely qualified to respond to this outbreak. /sarc1 -
Not forgetting racist tendenciesNigel_Foremain said:
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column0 -
Miles Davis, in particular ?rcs1000 said:
Protecting people from jazz is one of the few subjects I would expect PBers to be united on.CharlieShark said:Nice.
Sam Dumitriu
@Sam_Dumitriu
London's Metropolitan Police have objected to the opening of a new jazz bar in Covent Garden because criminals might target drunk jazz fans leaving at 1am.
(Don't mention the cocktail bar that is already in the same building open until 2am, or the gin parlour a few doors down already open until 1am.)0 -
I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.Nigel_Foremain said:Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
4 -
Does Nana Plaza specialise in brothels for Wayne Rooney?Leon said:My picture ration
Valentine’s Day, evening, Bangkok, tonight
What makes this temporary collection of roses, perfumes, love hearts, pink cuddly toys with I LOVE YOU embroidery is that it is right outside Nana Plaza, Bangkok’s largest complex of brothels0 -
It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.Nigel_Foremain said:
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column
The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....4 -
The world is complex, and the majority of problems are hard to solve. It is therefore comforting when someone comes along with an easy 'solution' to a complex problem, especially if you are not an expert in that problem.glw said:
I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.Nigel_Foremain said:Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
Even more so, when the solution is: "It's *their* fault, not yours!"3 -
Very true. The mystery is why one of our own who has had such ample opportunities to collect and evaluate such information nevertheless reaches the same political conclusions as someone who has been inside a caravan in Jaywick the whole time…..RochdalePioneers said:Reform voters tend to be low information voters. They don't know much about the detail of how the world works and they don't care - they just want things to be good for them and their own.
1 -
Trump 2.0 was all about the price of eggs and the price of gas. But man, those rust belt voters are going to be so disappointed.williamglenn said:
I don't really see the comparison. High Brexit was characterised by wall-to-wall mockery of the Brexiteers and hysteria about a No Deal Hard Brexit that never happened.EPG said:This era feels like high Brexit when the right-wing boys were parading around like masters of the universe. A few years after disrupting everything, they left people not better off but poorer and feeling miserable.
Trump 2.0 is more like the end of a long culture war that has been comprehensibly lost by his opponents.2 -
The most seductive words in the English language are "it's not your fault".JosiasJessop said:
The world is complex, and the majority of problems are hard to solve. It is therefore comforting when someone comes along with an easy 'solution' to a complex problem, especially if you are not an expert in that problem.glw said:
I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.Nigel_Foremain said:Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
Even more so, when the solution is: "It's *their* fault, not yours!"0 -
She certainly wouldn't be rolling over for Putin, and would be giving that orange surrendering twat a good earful tooMarqueeMark said:
It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.Nigel_Foremain said:
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column
The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....1 -
O/T, My Spotify random player has just picked, back-to-back, two of the greatest songs about horse racing ever written:
Elbow - The Fix followed by The Pogues - Bottle of Smoke.
(The third being The Galway Farmer by Show of Hands. Go on, treat yourself to a medley - although The Pogues are a bit sweary so may be NSFW...)
Is there a fourth?3 -
If she's guilty then she is currently correctly incarcerated. It does no harm to re-investigate the evidence. If she is still found guilty she stays there. If she is innocent, then its in all our interests to have justice done.OldKingCole said:
There was an article in Guardian (yes, I know) earlier this week by Neena Modi, Professor of Neonatal medicine at Imperial College and past president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, in which she sets out her concern, notably that Countess of Chester wasn't equipped or staffed to deal with really seriously ill babies, and some at least of these children had been identified as such before their mothers went into labour.numbertwelve said:
I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.Andy_JS said:Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe
I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.
But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
I think the great danger about this case is that a lot of people have started taking an interest but without enough evidence. They were not in the court for the trial. They did not hear the witnesses. They are aware of previous failures on legal systems, such as the seemingly similar Dutch case. And so a lot of people are starting to question whether the outcome of the case was right.
I am always skeptical when statistics and juries meet. In general the great unwashed has little comprehension of statistics and is certainly not able to spot fallacies in the thinking. There was, allegedly, a chart showing that all the babies who died or were harmed happened when Letby was on duty. It has been alleged that other deaths happened when she was not there but were excluded from said chart. Some people suspect that the chart which seems so damning may in fact be an example of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy. Others assert that it isn't.
Its surely only fair (to all concerned) to be robust in this.7 -
I've probably got something nearly finished *. I'm sure there was a poll about factions and frictions in Ref UKrcs1000 said:Don't worry TSE, I'll try and contribute a header or two.
.
Or JD Vance needs a good fisking.
* I'm very good at nearly finishing things.1 -
I woud suggest that in the US where the safety net has vast holes in it, and people are one decision away from absolute destitution, clinging to the hope provided by Trump - however false it might be - is perhaps understandable. In the UK and places like France where the safety net, whilst not comfortable, is at least usable, there is far less excuse.glw said:
I never understand how people are taken in by obvious grifters and charlatans like Trump, Farage, Musk et al. Their supporters must have something fundamentally wrong with them that they can not see that their Emperor is stark bollock naked. I have no doubt that the day will come when some of their biggest fans will deny every having supported these berks.Nigel_Foremain said:Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.
1 -
The overt grift/bribery is on another scale compared with Trump 1.0
Melania pitched her documentary idea to Bezos over dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Amazon agreed to pay $40M—with more than 70% going to her. And her agent has been trying to sell "sponsorships" for the film—starting at $10M—to CEOs at the inauguration. Buyers would get thanked in the credits and be invited to the premiere...
https://x.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/18902058382010452830 -
The Iron Lady. Going at Ronnie with her handbag. "Our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for almost 40 years" etc.Nigel_Foremain said:
She certainly wouldn't be rolling over for Putin, and would be giving that orange surrendering twat a good earful tooMarqueeMark said:
It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.Nigel_Foremain said:
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column
The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....
Say what you want about her - and everyone does. You knew what she stood for, and she wasn't frit.3 -
edit0
-
Putin seems to have as many, if not more, supporters from the right. Any "old lefties" who think Putin is a fellow leftie needs to give their head a serious wobble, Russia has been sliding into corrupt autocratic kleptocracy since the end of Gorbachev.Nigel_Foremain said:
Corbyistas are comfortable with murderous Russian fascists because they are anti-West and are therefore to be cheered on.Mexicanpete said:
How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?bigjohnowls said:
As Topping says so whatMarqueeMark said:
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...TOPPING said:
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).MarqueeMark said:
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.TOPPING said:
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:Richard_Tyndall said:
'Supporting' is not just analysis.TOPPING said:
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.Leon said:
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?Foxy said:
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.Malmesbury said:
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.Andy_JS said:Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
They have lost and will be giving up land
They will be repaying America via mineral rights.
Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945
As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.
It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.
Zelensky will be fine mind
Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
It's clear that if Putin is appeased then he'll be back for more of Ukraine in a few years because that is what has already happened with the 2014 Crimea invasion.3 -
People with "easy answers" are the very people we should be most wary of. Even a moderate knowledge of history, or just experience of life, should make the public wary of such people. That grown adults in their later years still fall for this obvious tripe is something I find very hard to understand. My hunch is that most of their supporters know that Trump or Farage are no good, but they are engaging in self-deception, because it allows them to pretend that their worst instincts and views are valid, rather than rubbish they should have rejected or grown out of.JosiasJessop said:The world is complex, and the majority of problems are hard to solve. It is therefore comforting when someone comes along with an easy 'solution' to a complex problem, especially if you are not an expert in that problem.
Even more so, when the solution is: "It's *their* fault, not yours!"2 -
Fortunately 'Compared to 2009's high numbers, lab tests across the U.S. suggest cases this year are from the usual seasonal variants of the virus and not a new strain that has spilled over from animals.' [which would include birds] / not sarcastic.Jim_Miller said:Off topic, but inportant: How serious is the current flu outbreak? This serious:
"Influenza levels in the United States are the highest they’ve been in 15 years as winter weather persists and the second wave of the virus causes more and more infections, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
The most recent CDC Weekly U.S. Influenza Surveillance Report shows that 7.8% of visits to a healthcare provider were for respiratory illness, the worst since the swine flu pandemic in late 2009. According to the report, most flu statistics in the U.S. are trending up, including the positive flu infections (31.6%), the patients admitted to hospitals with the flu this week (48,661), and the number of deaths attributed to the flu this week (2%)."
source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/02/11/flu-influenza-cases-increase-2025-symptoms-cdc/78412536007/
Fortunately we now have an HHS secretary — and president — who are uniquely qualified to respond to this outbreak. /sarc
Not yet anyway.0 -
Ver interesting. Presumably these are fair-minded Conservatives. They ought not to be in the Tory column.Stuartinromford said:One of those polls where Reform voters are in a massively different place to Conservative voters, who are actually pretty close to LibLab opinion.
0 -
1
-
"In a Corner of Wales, Britain’s Hard-Right Reform U.K. Party Gains Ground
Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration party is winning over some disillusioned Labour voters by targeting regions that are struggling economically and by campaigning on local issues."
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/world/europe/reform-uk-wales-farage.html0 -
They have already had a dose of Trump. He didn't make their lives better, they saw that he's a crook, incompetent, and chaotic. How can any rational person think "this time will be different?"Richard_Tyndall said:I woud suggest that in the US where the safety net has vast holes in it, and people are one decision away from absolute destitution, clinging to the hope provided by Trump - however false it might be - is perhaps understandable. In the UK and places like France where the safety net, whilst not comfortable, is at least usable, there is far less excuse.
Now they have the world's richest man making arbitrary cuts to the very programmes intended to help the poorest make ends meet.
It's like the United States of Chickens elected the Fox again, and this time the Wolf has joined him for dinner.1 -
The horseshoe theory of politics is among the most compelling there is. The far-left loves Putin because he socks it to the West., The far-right loves him because he socks it to the woke. Both are very happy for the rest of us to sacrifice our democracy, rule of law and freedom of speech to see him win.Mexicanpete said:
How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?bigjohnowls said:
As Topping says so whatMarqueeMark said:
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...TOPPING said:
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).MarqueeMark said:
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.TOPPING said:
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:Richard_Tyndall said:
'Supporting' is not just analysis.TOPPING said:
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.Leon said:
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?Foxy said:
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.Malmesbury said:
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.Andy_JS said:Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
They have lost and will be giving up land
They will be repaying America via mineral rights.
Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945
As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.
It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.
Zelensky will be fine mind
Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
5 -
Also worth pointing out that at least some of those you mention and some of those like Anna Soubry mentioned by the OP would claim (with some justification) that it was not they but the parties that moved. They held their philosophical and political positions over an extended period of time and the parties moved away from them rather than vice versa.bondegezou said:FPT…
It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?CharlieShark said:
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.david_herdson said:
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.CharlieShark said:
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?david_herdson said:
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.JosiasJessop said:
Then they will never form a majority government.Andy_JS said:
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.JosiasJessop said:
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.JohnO said:The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
The ones I really dislike are the worms like Bercow who moved from one obnoxious extreme to another.1 -
I do wonder if there's a connection between believing/swallowing conspiracy theories and political extremism.
Certainly, both fascism and communism succeeded in selling a lot of conspiracy theories to the public.1 -
If Ukraine's position is weak enough without the US that they would indeed be best advised at that point to sue for terms on current lines, then sadly the accelerated mass killing of advancing Russians and the accelerated mass destruction of their remaining infrastructure is by far their best tactic in the intervening weeks.Dopermean said:
Putin seems to have as many, if not more, supporters from the right. Any "old lefties" who think Putin is a fellow leftie needs to give their head a serious wobble, Russia has been sliding into corrupt autocratic kleptocracy since the end of Gorbachev.Nigel_Foremain said:
Corbyistas are comfortable with murderous Russian fascists because they are anti-West and are therefore to be cheered on.Mexicanpete said:
How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?bigjohnowls said:
As Topping says so whatMarqueeMark said:
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...TOPPING said:
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).MarqueeMark said:
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.TOPPING said:
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:Richard_Tyndall said:
'Supporting' is not just analysis.TOPPING said:
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.Leon said:
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?Foxy said:
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.Malmesbury said:
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.Andy_JS said:Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
They have lost and will be giving up land
They will be repaying America via mineral rights.
Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945
As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.
It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.
Zelensky will be fine mind
Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.
It's clear that if Putin is appeased then he'll be back for more of Ukraine in a few years because that is what has already happened with the 2014 Crimea invasion.0 -
Great new government funded immigration campaign is landing in Albania.
Ben Gartside @BenGartside
Scoop: The UK is bigoted, Brexit is bad and housing is too expensive.
Inside the Government's undisclosed social media campaign to potential Albanian migrants.
Featuring pictures of flytipping, graffiti and Norwich.
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/uk-bigoted-brexit-bad-government-campaign-scare-migrants-35361020 -
The Lady is not for turningRochdalePioneers said:
The Iron Lady. Going at Ronnie with her handbag. "Our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for almost 40 years" etc.Nigel_Foremain said:
She certainly wouldn't be rolling over for Putin, and would be giving that orange surrendering twat a good earful tooMarqueeMark said:
It also shows they can fuck right off with any notion of a merger with the Conservative Party.Nigel_Foremain said:
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column
The Ghost of Margaret Thtcher will be getting into that tank to see them off....
Say what you want about her - and everyone does. You knew what she stood for, and she wasn't frit.1 -
There was that chap who founded the Northumbria Freedom Party or whatever it was and ended up a ScoTory Unionist I think via Slab (or was it the other way round?). Mind, someone has cleaned up the internet quite well.bondegezou said:FPT…
It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?CharlieShark said:
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.david_herdson said:
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.CharlieShark said:
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?david_herdson said:
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.JosiasJessop said:
Then they will never form a majority government.Andy_JS said:
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.JosiasJessop said:
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.JohnO said:The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.0 -
A bold prediction. Reform are peaking too soon. They may still rise a bit over the next year or so, but will then stagnate in the run-up to 2029 GE, and will decline during the heat of an election campaign, ending up with a core vote of around 20% or less as their lack of substance is revealed. Why? Lots of reasons. Tice is an idiot. Their policy offer is incoherent and unaffordable. Immigration will have come down. And Farage's end of the pier show will feel a bit old hat.2
-
You mean Judge Judy and Executioner, Shirley?numbertwelve said:
I wish instead of making these judgements in the print media, the papers asked the questions and then let the processes take their course.Andy_JS said:Didn't expect to read this in the Economist.
"It increasingly looks as if Lucy Letby’s conviction was unsafe
The case of a nurse jailed for killing babies exposes deep problems with British justice"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2025/02/10/it-increasingly-looks-as-if-lucy-letbys-conviction-was-unsafe
I am not close enough to the case to know one way or the other, but clearly Letby’s representatives have a right to argue that and to go through the judicial process to have the case reviewed. If the conviction is unsafe then she should be freed, obviously.
But there’s something in this whole saga I find deeply unedifying, with commentators enjoying loudly playing judge and jury in the centre of a deeply troubling situation which involves an awful lot of bereaved parents.
https://youtu.be/aq2u1bmkKUQ?si=k9bQjSPTkVTfTdqM
Commentators have been declaiming on the innocence or guilt of people on appeal since appeals and newspapers were invented. It's part of the process of open justice.
There is a long and ugly history of "Don't comment on legal proceedings. Just trust the Law, the Police etc."2 -
Oh do I? Thank you so much for your insightful analysis, even though it is probably complete bollocks. I am sure there are many that would not describe the populist, nationalist, racist (according to Alan Sked), Putin apologist, Trump enthusiast Nigel Farage as Fascist. And maybe even if he is all those things, maybe, just maybe he is not exactly a goosestepping black shirt fetishist. Maybe his friends Elon Musk and Donald Trump are not really election denying law bending thugs and are really upstanding protectors of democracy.Andy_JS said:
You continue to use the F word to describe political positions you don't like that definitely aren't fascist.Nigel_Foremain said:
Also shows that most reform voters are fundamentally gullible and/or have fascism fetishes.HYUFD said:Again a clear distinction between Reform voters and the other 3 main party voters on Ukraine. Most Tory, Labour and LD voters think a deal negotiated by Putin and Trump will benefit Russia most, a plurality of Reform voters think it will be a compromise.
Most Tory, Labour and LD voters also think Ukraine should not accept a deal which requires them to give up territory if it does not want to and continue providing military aid. Most Reform voters however think Ukraine should be encouraged to accept a deal and a plurality to cut off military aid if it doesn't.
Reform voters therefore very much in the Trump column
If you live in a gullible universe, then Nigel Farage, Elon Musk and Donald Trump are probably upstanding defenders of Liberal Democracy and their buddy Vlad Putin is only looking for a just and lasting peace with Ukraine.
In my universe, which is wary of wannabe demagogues and apologists for mass murderers of innocents, I like to describe Mr Farage and friends as fascist. Apologies if that offends your gullible sensibilities.1 -
Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS
As there was an investigation somebody clearly did
She is silent on fake dentist appointments2 -
These are the values the US shares with Europe, apparently, and which get the Spectator class so excited. I suppose Melania is Slovenian!Nigelb said:The overt grift/bribery is on another scale compared with Trump 1.0
Melania pitched her documentary idea to Bezos over dinner at Mar-a-Lago. Amazon agreed to pay $40M—with more than 70% going to her. And her agent has been trying to sell "sponsorships" for the film—starting at $10M—to CEOs at the inauguration. Buyers would get thanked in the credits and be invited to the premiere...
https://x.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1890205838201045283
0 -
Nobody can equal Zionists for believing/swallowing conspiracy theories.JosiasJessop said:I do wonder if there's a connection between believing/swallowing conspiracy theories and political extremism.
Certainly, both fascism and communism succeeded in selling a lot of conspiracy theories to the public.0 -
You don't need to understand how it currently works however to say it is not working for me. That is why they vote reform. These are people that won't be able to answer how do we make your life better but do understand that the status quo which has already immiserated them is not the answer so they pick one of the two options that aren't status quo because its all they have offered....greens or reformRochdalePioneers said:Reform voters tend to be low information voters. They don't know much about the detail of how the world works and they don't care - they just want things to be good for them and their own.
TBH there's something refreshing about that - if we're honest with ourselves many of us think we are more knowledgeable about some stuff than we actually are. Good at saying things that are plausible even if they aren't actual.
People expressing a view about how a Trump/Putin deal will be good for Putin. Perhaps. Perhaps not. We have no detail about what the deal might be. Not even any broad outlines of it. So all we're doing is letting our prejudices run wild and imagine what a deal might look like from two people we don't have a good opinion of. We are low information on this subject, no different to anyone else.2 -
It's outrageous. Fake dentists? Whatever next.bigjohnowls said:Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS
As there was an investigation somebody clearly did
She is silent on fake dentist appointments0 -
Fascism was popularised as a political concept by Mussolini, who was a socialist/communist/marxist just a few years earlier. This is direct evidence that the seemingly different political philosophies are actually rather appealing to the same sort of person.SouthamObserver said:
The horseshoe theory of politics is among the most compelling there is. The far-left loves Putin because he socks it to the West., The far-right loves him because he socks it to the woke. Both are very happy for the rest of us to sacrifice our democracy, rule of law and freedom of speech to see him win.Mexicanpete said:
How do you know Zelensky will be fine after an engineered defeat by Trump?bigjohnowls said:
As Topping says so whatMarqueeMark said:
Just today, Ukraine have hit a steel mill that produces 20% of Russia's steel...TOPPING said:
Naturally I didn't read your post (keep it pithy would be my advice).MarqueeMark said:
The Russian oil industry is now "all in" because the bulk of it is situated west of the Urals and now in range of Ukraine drone strikes. There could perhaps have been back channel chats to keep power and oil facilities "off limits" to both sides. But that hasn't happened. The latest Ukrainian strikes on oil refining and storage capacity are taking it off-line for months. Maybe longer, as Russia doesn't have access to spares embargoed by the West. Whilst chips for missiles might get smuggled in from various of the Stans, trying to smuggle in a number of distillation towers isn't possible. So the capacity to refine crude oil is reducing at an alarming rate for Russia.TOPPING said:
Where is the support bit in wot he wrote:Richard_Tyndall said:
'Supporting' is not just analysis.TOPPING said:
Having a view on the outcome of a conflict doesn't make one an appeaser or anything else. It makes one an analyst.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is appeasement. Just because it might happen doesn't make it any less appeasement. And all it will mean is that Russia rearm, reorganise and come back for another go in a few years. Anyone who supports this is indeed a fucking appeaser. Putin wins. Ukraine and Europe - inluding the UK - lose.Leon said:
So, wait, you’re saying iits going to end up as a Korea style armistice?Foxy said:
I think a ceasefire in place is most likely. That was in effect the position between 2014 and 2022, with a fair number of ceasefire violations.Malmesbury said:
My guess is that he is trying to impose a deal, as for Israel/Hamas.Andy_JS said:Trump's strategy is to be as confusing as possible so his opponents never quite know where he stands. Where does he stand on Ukraine? It's difficult to tell.
He is threatening both sides to get them to sign *something*. My guesstimate is a ceasefire in place.
It is possible for such ceasefire to endure (Korea and China/Taiwan for example) but they are inherently unstable. A ceasefire is different to a lasting peace treaty.
Both sides would re-arm and prepare for the next round. Ukraine would bind itself into the EU economic system, but probably not NATO. Russia would agitate for sanctions to drop.
If only we’d listened to that pb-er who told us all this 18 months ago; unfortunately I believe he was shouted down as a “Putinist shill” and a “fucking appeaser”
“I disagree. Putin and Russia are all in. Russia will not be defeated like this, ie with total Ukrainian victory
OTOH I can’t see how Russia wins, either. I predict a long bloody stalemate that ends with a Korean style partition and an exhausted armistice”
If it can't refine the oil, it has to store it until it can sell it. As sales to India are the latest to have ended, there's more need for storage - which storage the Ukrainians are destroying. If it can't store it, Russia has to stop production. Stopping production can be terminal to oil wells continuing production. It means they have to be reworked when production recommences. This process is very expensive and can take years - as was shown when the Soviet Union collapsed.
If Ukraine isn't leant on to stop hitting the Russian refining and storage capacity, it's hand in the negotaition gets stronger and stronger over time. No Russian oil = no money for Russia = no Russian army in Ukraine. Russia has planned its war on the expectation that Trump will step in to call for a ceasefire that fixes the current de facto borders. Russia is absolutely at the limit of holding its gains in Ukraine. Stockpiles of Soviet-era tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are largely gone; Russian production is a fraction of losses on the battlefield. Its infantry are now trying to get to the Ukrainian lines in comandeered cars. Few make it. Many more months of this will expose the Russian army for the hollowed out entity that remains.
But if it says something like just one more push/Russia is going to run out of XYZ/any minute now he will fail/etc then give over.
They have lost and will be giving up land
They will be repaying America via mineral rights.
Its like Hitler claiming a triumph as he has a new heating system in his bunker in 1945
As one of the chief "Ukraine is going to win this" posters for the last 3 years.
It comes over as pathetic on the eve of defeat.
Zelensky will be fine mind
Citation please. The step from Corbyn fanboi to Putin fascist appears to be a short one.0 -
Bercow simply believes in whatever is expedient, at any particular point in time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Also worth pointing out that at least some of those you mention and some of those like Anna Soubry mentioned by the OP would claim (with some justification) that it was not they but the parties that moved. They held their philosophical and political positions over an extended period of time and the parties moved away from them rather than vice versa.bondegezou said:FPT…
It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?CharlieShark said:
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.david_herdson said:
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.CharlieShark said:
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?david_herdson said:
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.JosiasJessop said:
Then they will never form a majority government.Andy_JS said:
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.JosiasJessop said:
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.JohnO said:The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
The ones I really dislike are the worms like Bercow who moved from one obnoxious extreme to another.2 -
Did he really make things that much worse for them in his first term. I remember being extremely worried about him becoming President in 2016 and then completely underwhelmed (in a relieved way) by what he actually did in power. Very little of what he and his opponents predicted for his first term came to pass.glw said:
They have already had a dose of Trump. He didn't make their lives better, they saw that he's a crook, incompetent, and chaotic. How can any rational person think "this time will be different?"Richard_Tyndall said:I woud suggest that in the US where the safety net has vast holes in it, and people are one decision away from absolute destitution, clinging to the hope provided by Trump - however false it might be - is perhaps understandable. In the UK and places like France where the safety net, whilst not comfortable, is at least usable, there is far less excuse.
Now they have the world's richest man making arbitrary cuts to the very programmes intended to help the poorest make ends meet.
It's like the United States of Chickens elected the Fox again, and this time the Wolf has joined him for dinner.
I mean, for those of us watching from the outside and not invested in the result in the same way as the US electorate, it was obvious that he was going to learn his lesson and be more extreme second time around. But too many Americans are still poor and the Democrats chose a candidate who gave no signs at all of actually understanding the problems of the average working or middle class voter.
When you are not in that position it is easy to criticise their decisions but when you are drowning you will cling to any possible liferaft floating by, even if it turns out to be full of holes.
This in no way forgives Trump and his cabal, but I do think we are too harsh on the US voters from our nice, relatively well supported, lives in the UK.1 -
Or whatever Mrs Bercow tells him to believeSean_F said:
Bercow simply believes in whatever is expedient, at any particular point in time.Richard_Tyndall said:
Also worth pointing out that at least some of those you mention and some of those like Anna Soubry mentioned by the OP would claim (with some justification) that it was not they but the parties that moved. They held their philosophical and political positions over an extended period of time and the parties moved away from them rather than vice versa.bondegezou said:FPT…
It is that unique? What of Roy Jenkins (Lab-SDP-LibDem) or Stratton Mills (UUP-Con-APNI) or Enoch Powell (Con-UUP) or Winston Churchill (Con-Lib-ind-Con) or Oswald Mosley (Conservative-Independent-Labour-New Party-Union Movement-National Party of Europe) or Dick Taverne (Lab-Democratic Labour-SDP-LibDem) or Jim Sillars (Lab-Scottish Labour Party-SNP)?CharlieShark said:
Thanks. Certainly we cannot blame the public for being promiscuous when our politicians are flipping from party to party, sometimes for pure opportunism.david_herdson said:
I'm also on my third party since 1995. But my defections are, in their own small way, a measure of the volatility on the centre-right. If the Tories were still sensibly conservative, I'd still be there. For that matter, had the Lib Dems had a more democratic (and politically viable) Brexit policy in 2019, I'd have moved directly across. And if the YP could have been made more functional and if the wider British and international picture wasn't so acute, I'd still be working there too - but it isn't and time is too critical to take the chance. Anyway, my objection to the Lib Dems is now in the past.CharlieShark said:
Apologies if wrong and not a dig, but are you not on your third party since 2019?david_herdson said:
Never is a long time. I remember people saying Labour would never win another election not that long ago. The electorate is uniquely volatile and disaligned from party identification. This is not a particularly good thing - stability and institutional memory matters and too much disalignment is almost as bad as too much partisanship - but it is where we are.JosiasJessop said:
Then they will never form a majority government.Andy_JS said:
The Tories aren't going to win those types of seat back.JosiasJessop said:
Ditto here in South Cambridgeshire / St Neots constituencies. Once true blue.JohnO said:The Conservatives lost over 60 seats to the LibDems, including 6 here in leafy Surrey (12,000 majority in my constituency). I’m struggling to see how a pact with Reform will entice those defectors back into the blue fold.
To be clear, I don't blame the electorate for being politically promiscuous: I blame the parties for not giving a solid, consistent, values-based programme.
There's a reason people like Anna Soubry (Con-SDP-Con-Ind Grp-Change-Lab) or Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh (Con-Lab-SNP-Alba) aren't taken seriously.
The 'unique volatility' I would largely put at the door of politicians moving parties at a rate we haven't really experienced for a long time.
The ones I really dislike are the worms like Bercow who moved from one obnoxious extreme to another.2 -
Well she was followed when she claimed to be going to the dentist.Northern_Al said:
It's outrageous. Fake dentists? Whatever next.bigjohnowls said:Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS
As there was an investigation somebody clearly did
She is silent on fake dentist appointments
She went to a Labour Party meeting
So indeed fake dentists0 -
@Luckyguy1983 gives it a good try...bigjohnowls said:
Nobody can equal Zionists for believing/swallowing conspiracy theories.JosiasJessop said:I do wonder if there's a connection between believing/swallowing conspiracy theories and political extremism.
Certainly, both fascism and communism succeeded in selling a lot of conspiracy theories to the public.
0 -
Perhaps the clp chair was a dentist?bigjohnowls said:
Well she was followed when she claimed to be going to the dentist.Northern_Al said:
It's outrageous. Fake dentists? Whatever next.bigjohnowls said:Austerity Reeves says nobody raised concerns about her expenses when at HBoS
As there was an investigation somebody clearly did
She is silent on fake dentist appointments
She went to a Labour Party meeting
So indeed fake dentists 0 -
Sound of the Thunder, maybe? (Fureys)MarqueeMark said:O/T, My Spotify random player has just picked, back-to-back, two of the greatest songs about horse racing ever written:
Elbow - The Fix followed by The Pogues - Bottle of Smoke.
(The third being The Galway Farmer by Show of Hands. Go on, treat yourself to a medley - although The Pogues are a bit sweary so may be NSFW...)
Is there a fourth?0
