Howdy, Stranger!

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

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times – politicalbetting.com

1235

Comments

  • Daily Mail is fawning. This was the day SKS came back.

    That sound you can hear in the distance is the champagne bottles popping in Labour HQ and Downing Street.
    I honestly think SKS’s ability to confound his critics really should be studied.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,483

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It is going to get worse for Labour. Trump and Musk are so going to butt-**** Starmer in half an hour. I am half expecting Andy Tate to be declared Prime Minister whilst Starmer is arrested for treason.

    On the other hand, in other news, what is Suella on? She can be whatever she wants. If she doesn't want to be English/British, so be it, but she has no right to imply any of the England football team, past and present, that they aren't English. I am sure she sees some racist point scoring win in amongst her peculiar narrative. Silly woman.

    Nah.

    Trump/Musk approval ratings in the UK are dire. People might be supremely disappointed in Starmer, but the loathing some PBers feel for him is unusual. The contrast of the (relatively) benign Starmer with the grostesque US administration can only help him.

    The comments on the BBC demonstrate the appetite for a Love Actually moment. People are aghast at the way Canada has been treated, and despite some of the clever economics chat on here, would support the PM if we responded in kind.
    For sure. As soon as the US turned on Canada and Mexico, I decided to cut loose from my financial commitments to the US. Netflix, AppleTV, Paramount, all cancelled. Amazon Prime scheduled to stop in the autumn. No more Californian Pinot from Virgin Wines or Alaskan salmon from Waitrose. Not using Amazon at all is the tough one - the time and hassle it takes to try and buy the same stuff from domestic online suppliers, compared to the easy click and buy from Amazon, is remarkable. But I will do my best. The big question is my already booked trip to the US for 2026, which I may have to re-envisage as a mostly Canadian road trip.
    It’s our 40th wedding anniversary this year and my wife is overdue a medal for good conduct and long suffering. We both have an interest in American history and had planned a trip to Washington and the civil war battle sites as a special treat.

    Are you saying I should rethink this?
    A trip to the Nissan factory followed by Marston Moor, Naseby and Edge Hill.

    Save the American visit for the 50th.
    Rather more to the Civil Wars of the Islands than that. Dunbar, Launceston, Culloden, Newburn, Worcester, Killiecrankie, Newark, Lyme Regis, the Irish sites, Stow on the Wold, etc. etc. all spring to mind. At least DavidL's ticked off the siege of Dundee.
    Indeed.

    But it seems odd how little known the battlefields of Britain are.

    I've never been to those of Marston Moor, Towton or Stamford Bridge even though I must have been within a few miles of them hundreds of times.

    Well that's something I can remedy when the weather improves.
    I'm planning to do Bosworth next week.
    I'm much the same. I have certainly been to Edge Hill and Cheriton. But I have also been to Arnhem, Waterloo, Marengo, Salamanca, Ciudad Rodrigo, Fuentes de Oñoro, Bussaco, Austerlitz, Kosovo Polje, the Siege of Malta, Sriringapatnam, the Teutobuger Wald etc. Must try to get to some more British battlefields
    And Poltava! Not sure how I forgot it. Especially as I saw pix this week of them taking down the statue of Peter the Great from outside the museum. Thus providing one of those "shit I've been there" moments from the war. Ukrainian paratroopers mustering at Kyiv Passazhirsky, Russian ACVs driving along the Dnipro embankment at Podil, refugees at Peremysl station, the Russians bouncing a drone off the Chornobyl sarcophagus the other week. Shit I am so tempted to go for a beer in Lviv
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,651
    Of course the "great trade deal" is a way of keeping us away from the EU.

    So clever on Trump's part.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,251
    edited February 27
    nico67 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    There’s a lot of hat-eating tonight. Critics will find a way to do the PM down, ofc. Say he gave too much or too little. Was too fawning or not enough. They'd have done it better. Nothing will come of it.

    But in their black shrivelled heart they'll know Starmer played a blinder.

    If a Tory had said and done exactly the same as Starmer these people would be saying that it was totally embarrassing.
    I found it embarrassing and nauseating at times. But Starmer needed to avoid a calamity and come back with a few scraps from the buffet table which he achieved ,
    The BBC was indeed nauseating and embarrassing.
    And a State Visit? Ugh!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,129

    Daily Mail is fawning. This was the day SKS came back.

    The Lib Dems should get another boost from the anti-Trump centre-left vote switching over.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,483

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:

    Eabhal said:

    It is going to get worse for Labour. Trump and Musk are so going to butt-**** Starmer in half an hour. I am half expecting Andy Tate to be declared Prime Minister whilst Starmer is arrested for treason.

    On the other hand, in other news, what is Suella on? She can be whatever she wants. If she doesn't want to be English/British, so be it, but she has no right to imply any of the England football team, past and present, that they aren't English. I am sure she sees some racist point scoring win in amongst her peculiar narrative. Silly woman.

    Nah.

    Trump/Musk approval ratings in the UK are dire. People might be supremely disappointed in Starmer, but the loathing some PBers feel for him is unusual. The contrast of the (relatively) benign Starmer with the grostesque US administration can only help him.

    The comments on the BBC demonstrate the appetite for a Love Actually moment. People are aghast at the way Canada has been treated, and despite some of the clever economics chat on here, would support the PM if we responded in kind.
    For sure. As soon as the US turned on Canada and Mexico, I decided to cut loose from my financial commitments to the US. Netflix, AppleTV, Paramount, all cancelled. Amazon Prime scheduled to stop in the autumn. No more Californian Pinot from Virgin Wines or Alaskan salmon from Waitrose. Not using Amazon at all is the tough one - the time and hassle it takes to try and buy the same stuff from domestic online suppliers, compared to the easy click and buy from Amazon, is remarkable. But I will do my best. The big question is my already booked trip to the US for 2026, which I may have to re-envisage as a mostly Canadian road trip.
    It’s our 40th wedding anniversary this year and my wife is overdue a medal for good conduct and long suffering. We both have an interest in American history and had planned a trip to Washington and the civil war battle sites as a special treat.

    Are you saying I should rethink this?
    A trip to the Nissan factory followed by Marston Moor, Naseby and Edge Hill.

    Save the American visit for the 50th.
    Rather more to the Civil Wars of the Islands than that. Dunbar, Launceston, Culloden, Newburn, Worcester, Killiecrankie, Newark, Lyme Regis, the Irish sites, Stow on the Wold, etc. etc. all spring to mind. At least DavidL's ticked off the siege of Dundee.
    Indeed.

    But it seems odd how little known the battlefields of Britain are.

    I've never been to those of Marston Moor, Towton or Stamford Bridge even though I must have been within a few miles of them hundreds of times.

    Well that's something I can remedy when the weather improves.
    I'm planning to do Bosworth next week.
    I'm much the same. I have certainly been to Edge Hill and Cheriton. But I have also been to Arnhem, Waterloo, Marengo, Salamanca, Ciudad Rodrigo, Fuentes de Oñoro, Bussaco, Austerlitz, Kosovo Polje, the Siege of Malta, Sriringapatnam, the Teutobuger Wald etc. Must try to get to some more British battlefields
    Barnet (1471) is on the Northern line.
    And I have indeed been there
    1471?
    A bit more recently, my brother used to live there
  • Daily Mail is fawning. This was the day SKS came back.

    The reason they are 'fawming' is because of Trump's hope for a US - UK trade deal to avoid tariffs and end rejoining Europe

    Do you think this is what Labour supporters want
  • Of course anyone who has actually studied Sir Keir and Labour knows he was never “Mr EU” or “Mr Remain” and it’s purely laziness to say otherwise.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,157
    edited February 27
    Nigelb said:

    Sundowning, or just the same old ?

    I can’t believe I said that: Trump doesn’t remember calling Zelenskyy “dictator”
    https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/02/27/i-cant-believe-i-said-that-trump-doesnt-remember-calling-zelenskyy-dictator/

    Sundown you better take care
    If I find you've been creeping round Putin's back stairs
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,155
    edited February 27
    This is a very interesting discussion with Yuval Levin on Trump's use of executive power, the role of Congress, and the need to broaden coalitions

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/05/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-yuval-levin.html

    Levin seems to think Trump's approach won't have much success, partly because the MAGA coalition is too narrow to get much legislation through Congress.

    (from 3 weeks ago)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,188

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    The point is that it's the availability of Diego Garcia that matters to the US.
    How much we end up paying for it is a matter of sublime indifference to Trump.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,254

    Of course the "great trade deal" is a way of keeping us away from the EU.

    So clever on Trump's part.

    Again what we do and what we say to Trump may differ. Nobody in their right mind is going to want to do a trade deal with Trump, such deals are worthless as Canada and Mexico can clearly explain. I suspect we will be doing a lot of deals with the EU and other like minded countries, out of necessity not down to any leaver or remainer ideology. But lets keep the erratic idiot in the Whitehouse smiling as long as we can.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,428

    Daily Mail is fawning. This was the day SKS came back.

    That sound you can hear in the distance is the champagne bottles popping in Labour HQ and Downing Street.
    I honestly think SKS’s ability to confound his critics really should be studied.
    The economy still needs to start growing though. Until and unless that happens, Labour’s original sin of that July speech by Reeves will continue to haunt them.

    Granted no developed economies are growing at the moment. Well, except the US and Canada. But the problems Labour inherited remain, and Starmer’s lucky generalship sadly doesn’t seem to extend to positive global economic vibes.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001

    HYUFD said:

    Yes, given Reeves' ratings are even lower than the government's hard to see how Starmer cannot remove her

    But she's a firewall. He might want to hold off sacking her. Also she has (belatedly) tied herself to the growth agenda so it's a big victory for the anti-growth coalition if she's sacked, which seems a fairly dire message to send.
    Yes, you cannot give the anti-growth NIMBY's an inch or they will take 100 miles.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,129
    glw said:

    Of course the "great trade deal" is a way of keeping us away from the EU.

    So clever on Trump's part.

    Again what we do and what we say to Trump may differ. Nobody in their right mind is going to want to do a trade deal with Trump, such deals are worthless as Canada and Mexico can clearly explain. I suspect we will be doing a lot of deals with the EU and other like minded countries, out of necessity not down to any leaver or remainer ideology. But lets keep the erratic idiot in the Whitehouse smiling as long as we can.
    On the other hand Peter Mandelson would love to be able to take the credit for a UK-US trade deal so I wouldn’t rule it out.
  • TimS said:

    Daily Mail is fawning. This was the day SKS came back.

    That sound you can hear in the distance is the champagne bottles popping in Labour HQ and Downing Street.
    I honestly think SKS’s ability to confound his critics really should be studied.
    The economy still needs to start growing though. Until and unless that happens, Labour’s original sin of that July speech by Reeves will continue to haunt them.

    Granted no developed economies are growing at the moment. Well, except the US and Canada. But the problems Labour inherited remain, and Starmer’s lucky generalship sadly doesn’t seem to extend to positive global economic vibes.

    He is a very lucky general.

    When immigration comes down he will see his ratings go up significantly IMHO.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100
    I like the idea that there is some political savvy at the top of Whitehall and Westminster. We need some smart brains to navigate the next four years.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001
    edited February 27
    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sundowning, or just the same old ?

    I can’t believe I said that: Trump doesn’t remember calling Zelenskyy “dictator”
    https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/02/27/i-cant-believe-i-said-that-trump-doesnt-remember-calling-zelenskyy-dictator/

    Maybe doesn't remember.

    Weirdly, those who called Biden senile are now silent.
    On the contrary, the line taken is that it is absurd to suggest the erratic and forgetful 78 year old has any similarities whatsoever with the frail and forgetful (then) 78 year old Biden.

    Because he's loud there's apparently no valid comparison?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    edited February 27
    I used a phone box today and the odd thing was that when it got down to 10p the money counter seemed to get stuck and the call continued indefinitely without the need to put in any more coins. I thought it was a technical fault with that particular phone. But then I used another phonebox and the same thing happened again. Maybe this is supposed to happen? BT may have decided to be generous and let people carry on their calls for as long as they want because it doesn't cost them much, but I certainly haven't seen it advertised anywhere, so perhaps they don't want lots of people to know about it. On the other hand it may have just been a coincidence with those two phones.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,405

    Daily Mail is fawning. This was the day SKS came back.

    That sound you can hear in the distance is the champagne bottles popping in Labour HQ and Downing Street.
    Nyetimber bottles, surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sundowning, or just the same old ?

    I can’t believe I said that: Trump doesn’t remember calling Zelenskyy “dictator”
    https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/02/27/i-cant-believe-i-said-that-trump-doesnt-remember-calling-zelenskyy-dictator/

    Maybe doesn't remember.

    Weirdly, those who called Biden senile are now silent.
    Interesting that the large bruise on Trump's hand - which they had made efforts to cover with make-up - has been likened to bruises that those who use blood-thinners get.

    Trump may have some serious, undisclosed health issues.

    Maybe, but people speculate that about Putin too, and if it is true it hasn't had any obvious effect.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,186
    edited February 27

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    'A discount' on a shit deterrent that doesn't fire and is part of the US nuclear arsenal not ours isn't an actual thing. Who else has paid full whack for it if we're getting mate's rates?
  • Nigelb said:

    Sundowning, or just the same old ?

    I can’t believe I said that: Trump doesn’t remember calling Zelenskyy “dictator”
    https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/02/27/i-cant-believe-i-said-that-trump-doesnt-remember-calling-zelenskyy-dictator/

    It's simple. When people don't play ball with Trump he insults them; when they play nice he praises them. When Zelensky wasn't playing ball he got called a dictator as an insult; now that a deal is on the table, it's convenient for Trump to forget he said that
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,186
    Jonathan said:

    I like the idea that there is some political savvy at the top of Whitehall and Westminster. We need some smart brains to navigate the next four years.

    :lol:

    I am enjoying this Jonathan. It's a subtle and brilliant pisstake.
  • Must be Sir Keir’s best day as PM.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    I think one of the most notable moments was Trump being totally fine with Starmer slapping down his VP, and then going on to say Starmer was great after the meetings. Starmer blew smoke up his arse AND showed strength, which Trump respects. Very cleverly done.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001
    Is 'twitter brain' an official medical condition now? As it probably could be.

  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    Good to have you back on the sane team Moon.
    What the fuck does that mean?

    I hate the new Chagos deal with US and India, just as much as I hate the 1960’s deal with US. The whole enterprise has been unchristian by the UK government. I would NEVER have signed up to what we did in sixties and seventies.

    In 1960s, deluded UK thinking it was big player on World Stage, not accepting those days were over, agreed to ethnically cleansed the islands for US base.

    Now US this time in league with India want us to sign a lease deal they’ve written. I wouldn’t sign it. I would do like Lord Dannat said, walk away and let India and US manage the islands going forward, rather than be their good doggy doing it for them.

    Doing it my way and walking away from this like Lord Dannat said, world most likely hurt UK financially over all in bigger picture, than sign it with mate rates on US weaponry, but I’d rather take that financial hit than sign this Chagos Deal. So in order to be a Christian minded government. Stick to your Christian Principles and Christian Princples will look after you.

    I was proved right that Trump has zero problem signing it. Now I’m off to bed as I got early start with sheep.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,769
    edited February 27
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sundowning, or just the same old ?

    I can’t believe I said that: Trump doesn’t remember calling Zelenskyy “dictator”
    https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/02/27/i-cant-believe-i-said-that-trump-doesnt-remember-calling-zelenskyy-dictator/

    Maybe doesn't remember.

    Weirdly, those who called Biden senile are now silent.
    Interesting that the large bruise on Trump's hand - which they had made efforts to cover with make-up - has been likened to bruises that those who use blood-thinners get.

    Trump may have some serious, undisclosed health issues.

    Maybe, but people speculate that about Putin too, and if it is true it hasn't had any obvious effect.
    Since my serious dvt 18 months ago I am on maximum daily doses of apixaban for life and in addition to my pacemaker bracelet I have an apixaban one as well in case of an emergency

    I have regular blood tests and monitoring so actually being on blood thinners may actually be treating an issue

    Also I do not bruise but can bleed more readily
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,129
    Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001
    biggles said:

    I think one of the most notable moments was Trump being totally fine with Starmer slapping down his VP, and then going on to say Starmer was great after the meetings. Starmer blew smoke up his arse AND showed strength, which Trump respects. Very cleverly done.

    Looking over at Guido (it's useful to see what lines are being taken in other places), the assessment is that Trump and Vance slammed Starmer, didn't commit to Chagos and refused to rule out tariffs. There is an implication Starmer made a decent effort, though obviously they don't think it bore fruit.
  • Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.

    Yawn, you were DESPERATE for Sir Keir to fail and be walked all over you.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 848
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sundowning, or just the same old ?

    I can’t believe I said that: Trump doesn’t remember calling Zelenskyy “dictator”
    https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/02/27/i-cant-believe-i-said-that-trump-doesnt-remember-calling-zelenskyy-dictator/

    Maybe doesn't remember.

    Weirdly, those who called Biden senile are now silent.
    Interesting that the large bruise on Trump's hand - which they had made efforts to cover with make-up - has been likened to bruises that those who use blood-thinners get.

    Trump may have some serious, undisclosed health issues.

    Maybe, but people speculate that about Putin too, and if it is true it hasn't had any obvious effect.
    A 78 year old overweight fast food addict?
    Be amazing if he's not on heavy medication for high BP and cholesterol.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,766
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    The point is that it's the availability of Diego Garcia that matters to the US.
    How much we end up paying for it is a matter of sublime indifference to Trump.
    True but the Americans have been pushing the UK to get a deal with Mauritius, to the extent of taking the UK to an international tribunal against its wishes. They may not care about the amount of money to seal the deal but they do care that the deal is in place. Presumably because its own arrangement with the UK is void unless the UK is a legally accepted counterparty.

    The unknown up to now has been Donald Trump who has a very lax relationship with the law generally and we might imagine would care even less about international law. But it seems he's following the advice from State Department or DoD lawyers, as have previous presidents.
  • Jonathan said:

    I like the idea that there is some political savvy at the top of Whitehall and Westminster. We need some smart brains to navigate the next four years.

    "You're either incredibly smart or incredibly stupid." - the late, great Gene Hackman in "Enemy of the State".
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,812
    kle4 said:

    biggles said:

    I think one of the most notable moments was Trump being totally fine with Starmer slapping down his VP, and then going on to say Starmer was great after the meetings. Starmer blew smoke up his arse AND showed strength, which Trump respects. Very cleverly done.

    Looking over at Guido (it's useful to see what lines are being taken in other places), the assessment is that Trump and Vance slammed Starmer, didn't commit to Chagos and refused to rule out tariffs. There is an implication Starmer made a decent effort, though obviously they don't think it bore fruit.
    Yes but.
    Guido is full of shit you know.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,186
    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    The point is that it's the availability of Diego Garcia that matters to the US.
    How much we end up paying for it is a matter of sublime indifference to Trump.
    True but the Americans have been pushing the UK to get a deal with Mauritius, to the extent of taking the UK to an international tribunal against its wishes. They may not care about the amount of money to seal the deal but they do care that the deal is in place. Presumably because its own arrangement with the UK is void unless the UK is a legally accepted counterparty.

    The unknown up to now has been Donald Trump who has a very lax relationship with the law generally and we might imagine would care even less about international law. But it seems he's following the advice from State Department or DoD lawyers, as have previous presidents.
    This is untrue. The decisions of the 'court' are advisory only on the UK. They have no legal weight. Giving away the islands is a political choice. And it is one that is likely to make Keir Starmer's old firm extremely wealthy.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001

    nico67 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    There’s a lot of hat-eating tonight. Critics will find a way to do the PM down, ofc. Say he gave too much or too little. Was too fawning or not enough. They'd have done it better. Nothing will come of it.

    But in their black shrivelled heart they'll know Starmer played a blinder.

    If a Tory had said and done exactly the same as Starmer these people would be saying that it was totally embarrassing.
    I found it embarrassing and nauseating at times. But Starmer needed to avoid a calamity and come back with a few scraps from the buffet table which he achieved ,
    The BBC was indeed nauseating and embarrassing.
    And a State Visit? Ugh!
    I take an entirely blase view on state visits. It's not really endorsement of anyone, and though it's unlikely to actually change anything substantively (I assume diplomatic negotiators the world over are cold and pragmatic about such matters), it probably does put an individual head of state in a better mood.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,812
    Obviously done some body language homework.
    The hand on the shoulder as signifier of dominance and safety.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    'A discount' on a shit deterrent that doesn't fire and is part of the US nuclear arsenal not ours isn't an actual thing. Who else has paid full whack for it if we're getting mate's rates?
    I’m tempted to say you are right, as I agree with you and we are on same page, that was awful decision making by UK governments of sixties and seventies to take that discount to do ethic cleansing for USA, and again with updated deal India more happy with its just another bad Chagos deal for UK with fact we are still involved in this shit show and not wholly removed ourselves from it.
    But part of me still believes in Nuclear Deterrent preventing World War 3.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,001
    edited February 27
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    biggles said:

    I think one of the most notable moments was Trump being totally fine with Starmer slapping down his VP, and then going on to say Starmer was great after the meetings. Starmer blew smoke up his arse AND showed strength, which Trump respects. Very cleverly done.

    Looking over at Guido (it's useful to see what lines are being taken in other places), the assessment is that Trump and Vance slammed Starmer, didn't commit to Chagos and refused to rule out tariffs. There is an implication Starmer made a decent effort, though obviously they don't think it bore fruit.
    Yes but.
    Guido is full of shit you know.
    That was irrelevant to my purpose, which was to see what position they were taking (which thesedays is likely to be the same position Reform will take). Same reason it was worth checking out fringe lefty sites when Corbyn was leader.
  • Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.

    Yawn, you were DESPERATE for Sir Keir to fail and be walked all over you.
    We seem to be very excited tonight and even now shouting

    Let's see how this plays out in the days and weeks ahead

    Starmer did OK but if the price of avoiding tariffs is a US - UK trade deal with all the implications of that I doubt many Labour supporters will be happy nor Lib dems
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,812
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    biggles said:

    I think one of the most notable moments was Trump being totally fine with Starmer slapping down his VP, and then going on to say Starmer was great after the meetings. Starmer blew smoke up his arse AND showed strength, which Trump respects. Very cleverly done.

    Looking over at Guido (it's useful to see what lines are being taken in other places), the assessment is that Trump and Vance slammed Starmer, didn't commit to Chagos and refused to rule out tariffs. There is an implication Starmer made a decent effort, though obviously they don't think it bore fruit.
    Yes but.
    Guido is full of shit you know.
    That was irrelevant to my purpose, which was to see what position they were taking (which thesedays is likely to be the same position Reform will take). Same reason it was worth checking out fringe lefty sites when Corbyn was leader.
    On which topic where's Nigel?
    I haven't heard a pontification for some time.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,186
    Meanwhile in actual bad news for Reform (in my opinion) they unveiled their candidate for Hull mayor amid pyroctechnics and dry ice, and it's a former boxer, who seems a lovely, lovely man and also a great sportsman and local boy, but no Ben Houchen. I just don't see how he'll cut it in politics. It's a misstep in my opinion, choosing a candidate for the optics.

    I hope I'm wrong, and I will be very happy if he makes it and is good - he'll need a lot of support.
  • kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    biggles said:

    I think one of the most notable moments was Trump being totally fine with Starmer slapping down his VP, and then going on to say Starmer was great after the meetings. Starmer blew smoke up his arse AND showed strength, which Trump respects. Very cleverly done.

    Looking over at Guido (it's useful to see what lines are being taken in other places), the assessment is that Trump and Vance slammed Starmer, didn't commit to Chagos and refused to rule out tariffs. There is an implication Starmer made a decent effort, though obviously they don't think it bore fruit.
    Yes but.
    Guido is full of shit you know.
    That was irrelevant to my purpose, which was to see what position they were taking (which thesedays is likely to be the same position Reform will take). Same reason it was worth checking out fringe lefty sites when Corbyn was leader.
    The Red Roar was very good for figuring out what the Blairites were up to and Wankbox for the Corbyn fandom
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,766

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    The point is that it's the availability of Diego Garcia that matters to the US.
    How much we end up paying for it is a matter of sublime indifference to Trump.
    True but the Americans have been pushing the UK to get a deal with Mauritius, to the extent of taking the UK to an international tribunal against its wishes. They may not care about the amount of money to seal the deal but they do care that the deal is in place. Presumably because its own arrangement with the UK is void unless the UK is a legally accepted counterparty.

    The unknown up to now has been Donald Trump who has a very lax relationship with the law generally and we might imagine would care even less about international law. But it seems he's following the advice from State Department or DoD lawyers, as have previous presidents.
    This is untrue. The decisions of the 'court' are advisory only on the UK. They have no legal weight. Giving away the islands is a political choice. And it is one that is likely to make Keir Starmer's old firm extremely wealthy.
    That old "advisory" word again.

    But, yes, law does tend to be advisory.
  • Meanwhile in actual bad news for Reform (in my opinion) they unveiled their candidate for Hull mayor amid pyroctechnics and dry ice, and it's a former boxer, who seems a lovely, lovely man and also a great sportsman and local boy, but no Ben Houchen. I just don't see how he'll cut it in politics. It's a misstep in my opinion, choosing a candidate for the optics.

    I hope I'm wrong, and I will be very happy if he makes it and is good - he'll need a lot of support.

    Genuinely, do you honestly think Reform will win next time around?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100

    Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.

    Yawn, you were DESPERATE for Sir Keir to fail and be walked all over you.
    We seem to be very excited tonight and even now shouting

    Let's see how this plays out in the days and weeks ahead

    Starmer did OK but if the price of avoiding tariffs is a US - UK trade deal with all the implications of that I doubt many Labour supporters will be happy nor Lib dems
    It’s a bit low rent trying to carve out or insulate party advantage when the national interest is at stake. These are really difficult times,which are likely to get worse before they improve.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968

    FF43 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    The point is that it's the availability of Diego Garcia that matters to the US.
    How much we end up paying for it is a matter of sublime indifference to Trump.
    True but the Americans have been pushing the UK to get a deal with Mauritius, to the extent of taking the UK to an international tribunal against its wishes. They may not care about the amount of money to seal the deal but they do care that the deal is in place. Presumably because its own arrangement with the UK is void unless the UK is a legally accepted counterparty.

    The unknown up to now has been Donald Trump who has a very lax relationship with the law generally and we might imagine would care even less about international law. But it seems he's following the advice from State Department or DoD lawyers, as have previous presidents.
    This is untrue. The decisions of the 'court' are advisory only on the UK. They have no legal weight. Giving away the islands is a political choice. And it is one that is likely to make Keir Starmer's old firm extremely wealthy.
    Yes on the UN only being advisory bit, but you are wholly wrong that it’s all about UN rulings. Even without the rulings, where NATO allies didn’t support us, all UK and US had were some little places US paid money to to back us, the rulings themselves didn’t cause the problem, but how India was using it all around the region to make us look like the bad guys and hurting our soft power for making other security arrangements, arms sales and other business deals. That’s the pressure India put on us by sponsoring Mauritius through the process, it’s that’s pressure UK government has succumbed to, plus the enthusiasm of the US to have closer strategic security and economic ties with India. The fact British Indian Ocean Territory has the word British erased is just a bonus for India and US (plus as you said, if like last time we are now obliged to buy US weaponry for xxxxxxxxx number of years, or financially lose out on Chagos Island deal is further bonus for US).

    It was obvious Trump would endorse it.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279

    Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.

    Yawn, you were DESPERATE for Sir Keir to fail and be walked all over you.
    We seem to be very excited tonight and even now shouting

    Let's see how this plays out in the days and weeks ahead

    Starmer did OK but if the price of avoiding tariffs is a US - UK trade deal with all the implications of that I doubt many Labour supporters will be happy nor Lib dems
    The devil will be in the detail as it is over all these "deals" including the Chagos Islands.

    I don't know what else Starmer could have said and done - you don't go to someone else's house and pick a fight in their living room. It may be different if and when Trump comes back to London - we know he can do deference himself.

    The troupe of foreign leaders coming to the Oval Office illustrates the projection of American power for all to see. Whether you consider Starmer, Macron and the like supplicants or not, the truth is they have to pay a degree of homage at the court of the President - it's the reality of geopolitics and diplomacy.

    Ask yourself - would Badenoch have done or said anything different today?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,821
    I expect many would have been happier if Starmer told Trump to get lost as that’s probably what many Brits would like to do .

    But at what cost . As for the trade deal it’s not an all encompassing one , more centred around the tech industries which most of the public could care less about and it’s not going to be some farmers or NHS sell out .

    Would Starmer falling out with Trump help or hinder Ukraine. Surely at this time walking on egg shells is necessary even though it makes many of us deeply uncomfortable .



  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    The weekly numbers from Techne:

    Lab: 26%, Reform 25%, Con 22%, LD 13%, Green 8%

    No significant changes.

    Find Out Now has Reform five points up on Labour 28% to 23% with the Conservatives on 21%, LDs on 13% and Greens on 10%. They seem to be the best pollsters for both Reform and the Greens - may be a variation on weighting.

    Two Conservative defences, two Liberal Democrat defences and a Labour defence in tonight's round of local by elections. Three counting tonight, two tomorrow morning,
  • stodge said:

    Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.

    Yawn, you were DESPERATE for Sir Keir to fail and be walked all over you.
    We seem to be very excited tonight and even now shouting

    Let's see how this plays out in the days and weeks ahead

    Starmer did OK but if the price of avoiding tariffs is a US - UK trade deal with all the implications of that I doubt many Labour supporters will be happy nor Lib dems
    The devil will be in the detail as it is over all these "deals" including the Chagos Islands.

    I don't know what else Starmer could have said and done - you don't go to someone else's house and pick a fight in their living room. It may be different if and when Trump comes back to London - we know he can do deference himself.

    The troupe of foreign leaders coming to the Oval Office illustrates the projection of American power for all to see. Whether you consider Starmer, Macron and the like supplicants or not, the truth is they have to pay a degree of homage at the court of the President - it's the reality of geopolitics and diplomacy.

    Ask yourself - would Badenoch have done or said anything different today?
    I think Starmer did ok and seems to be acknowledged and no Badenoch wouldn't have done anything differently

    However we all know Trump is not to be trusted and who knows what he may say even tomorrow

    Sense of perspective is needed and to be honest Mandelson looks as if he was instrumental in a lot of today's talks
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,821
    MaxPB said:

    nico67 said:

    I expect many would have been happier if Starmer told Trump to get lost as that’s probably what many Brits would like to do .

    But at what cost . As for the trade deal it’s not an all encompassing one , more centred around the tech industries which most of the public could care less about and it’s not going to be some farmers or NHS sell out .

    Would Starmer falling out with Trump help or hinder Ukraine. Surely at this time walking on egg shells is necessary even though it makes many of us deeply uncomfortable .



    Starmer took the grown up approach and good thing too, it's probably the best day he's had since the election but a lot relies on Trump doing what he's agreed to which could unravel quite quickly after he gets a phone call from Putin.
    I have zero confidence in anything Trump says now . But Starmer couldn’t really do more and avoided any major drama during his visit .
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,155
    -
    nico67 said:

    I expect many would have been happier if Starmer told Trump to get lost as that’s probably what many Brits would like to do .

    But at what cost . As for the trade deal it’s not an all encompassing one , more centred around the tech industries which most of the public could care less about and it’s not going to be some farmers or NHS sell out .

    Would Starmer falling out with Trump help or hinder Ukraine. Surely at this time walking on egg shells is necessary even though it makes many of us deeply uncomfortable .



    Starmer looked bad, droned a bit too long, but did OK. Trump was quite well-behaved by his standards, so probably the invite from Charlie had its effect. Maybe the state visit means more to Trump than what happens in Ukraine?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    stodge said:

    The weekly numbers from Techne:

    Lab: 26%, Reform 25%, Con 22%, LD 13%, Green 8%

    No significant changes.

    Find Out Now has Reform five points up on Labour 28% to 23% with the Conservatives on 21%, LDs on 13% and Greens on 10%. They seem to be the best pollsters for both Reform and the Greens - may be a variation on weighting.

    Two Conservative defences, two Liberal Democrat defences and a Labour defence in tonight's round of local by elections. Three counting tonight, two tomorrow morning,

    An interesting one in Westminster / Vincent Square.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    kamski said:

    -

    nico67 said:

    I expect many would have been happier if Starmer told Trump to get lost as that’s probably what many Brits would like to do .

    But at what cost . As for the trade deal it’s not an all encompassing one , more centred around the tech industries which most of the public could care less about and it’s not going to be some farmers or NHS sell out .

    Would Starmer falling out with Trump help or hinder Ukraine. Surely at this time walking on egg shells is necessary even though it makes many of us deeply uncomfortable .

    Starmer looked bad, droned a bit too long, but did OK. Trump was quite well-behaved by his standards, so probably the invite from Charlie had its effect. Maybe the state visit means more to Trump than what happens in Ukraine?
    Yes, he loves the pomp and the pageantry. One of the few people to whom he showed real deference in his previous Presidential term was the late Queen.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    The weekly numbers from Techne:

    Lab: 26%, Reform 25%, Con 22%, LD 13%, Green 8%

    No significant changes.

    Find Out Now has Reform five points up on Labour 28% to 23% with the Conservatives on 21%, LDs on 13% and Greens on 10%. They seem to be the best pollsters for both Reform and the Greens - may be a variation on weighting.

    Two Conservative defences, two Liberal Democrat defences and a Labour defence in tonight's round of local by elections. Three counting tonight, two tomorrow morning,

    An interesting one in Westminster / Vincent Square.
    I'd conficdently expect a Conservative win on current polling including recent London local council by elections. However, it will be interesting to see how Reform fare - London hasn't been a strong area for them but a solid third would be respectable.

    As to whether any of this is indicative of what will happen in the 2026 round of local elections in London, I'd suggest not at this stage.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,360
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cewkkkvkzn9o

    "Death of Hackman and wife 'suspicious enough' for investigation, police say"
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    "Reform gain in Breckland.

    Reform UK 414
    Con 209
    Lab 99
    Green 41"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,247
    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    The weekly numbers from Techne:

    Lab: 26%, Reform 25%, Con 22%, LD 13%, Green 8%

    No significant changes.

    Find Out Now has Reform five points up on Labour 28% to 23% with the Conservatives on 21%, LDs on 13% and Greens on 10%. They seem to be the best pollsters for both Reform and the Greens - may be a variation on weighting.

    Two Conservative defences, two Liberal Democrat defences and a Labour defence in tonight's round of local by elections. Three counting tonight, two tomorrow morning,

    An interesting one in Westminster / Vincent Square.
    Reform have gained the Breckland seat from the Conservatives.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,153

    stodge said:

    Awkward, and it shows the political perils for Starmer. People who have been whipped up into a state of frenzy over Boris, Trump and Brexit will not suddenly start taking a sober view of the national interest. I expect the Lib Dems to gain at the expense of Labour.

    https://x.com/keir_starmer/status/1134833523959971840

    An endorsement from Donald Trump tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong with Boris Johnson’s politics and why he isn’t fit to be Prime Minister.

    Yawn, you were DESPERATE for Sir Keir to fail and be walked all over you.
    We seem to be very excited tonight and even now shouting

    Let's see how this plays out in the days and weeks ahead

    Starmer did OK but if the price of avoiding tariffs is a US - UK trade deal with all the implications of that I doubt many Labour supporters will be happy nor Lib dems
    The devil will be in the detail as it is over all these "deals" including the Chagos Islands.

    I don't know what else Starmer could have said and done - you don't go to someone else's house and pick a fight in their living room. It may be different if and when Trump comes back to London - we know he can do deference himself.

    The troupe of foreign leaders coming to the Oval Office illustrates the projection of American power for all to see. Whether you consider Starmer, Macron and the like supplicants or not, the truth is they have to pay a degree of homage at the court of the President - it's the reality of geopolitics and diplomacy.

    Ask yourself - would Badenoch have done or said anything different today?
    I think Starmer did ok and seems to be acknowledged and no Badenoch wouldn't have done anything differently

    "Black Truss" (LOL) would not have been able to resist the opportunity to come out with some off-topic culture wars bollocks for the scrofulous US alt-right audience and then the trip would have been all about that. There is absolutely no way she could have maintained the discipline required to pull off Starmer's consistenly on-message smarmy obsequience.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    Andy_JS said:

    "Reform gain in Breckland.

    Reform UK 414
    Con 209
    Lab 99
    Green 41"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2

    The Ward is in the South West Norfolk constituency formerly held by Liz Truss and now a Labour marginal. Reform ran a strong third and must think they have a chance of winning the seat at the next election and this will be a help.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    edited February 27
    Andy_JS said:

    "Reform gain in Breckland.

    Reform UK 414
    Con 209
    Lab 99
    Green 41"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2

    Ref 54.26%
    Con 27.39%
    Lab 12.98%
    Green 5.37%

    Changes

    Ref (didn't stand in 2023)
    Con -25.17%
    Lab -14.08%
    Green (didn't stand in 2023)

    Ind received 20.36% in 2023
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,767
    You may recall my view (which I stole from somebody else) about how you can track ideas and concepts over time. When I was talking about the word "warfighter" earlier, I recalled another term: the "atmospheric littoral". This new concept is where the land meets the air, from about the surface to about 100 yards up, to the tops of pylons and the lower drones. This somewhat romantic phrase appears to have been made more prosaic as it evolved into to the "air littoral" and thence to "air-ground littoral" or AGL.

    The British term for this zone is the "near surface", or "near surface warfare". A brief YouTube (5 mins) from the British Army is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_GXLIx6HdY
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,247
    stodge said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Reform gain in Breckland.

    Reform UK 414
    Con 209
    Lab 99
    Green 41"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2

    The Ward is in the South West Norfolk constituency formerly held by Liz Truss and now a Labour marginal. Reform ran a strong third and must think they have a chance of winning the seat at the next election and this will be a help.
    On current polling, Reform would win SW Norfolk easily.
  • nico67 said:

    I expect many would have been happier if Starmer told Trump to get lost as that’s probably what many Brits would like to do .

    But at what cost . As for the trade deal it’s not an all encompassing one , more centred around the tech industries which most of the public could care less about and it’s not going to be some farmers or NHS sell out .

    Would Starmer falling out with Trump help or hinder Ukraine. Surely at this time walking on egg shells is necessary even though it makes many of us deeply uncomfortable .



    We don't want a trade deal with the USA and we don't want a trade war with the USA.

    A few mutually beneficial agreements on minor things would be good but apart from that best to string them along as long as possible.

    Let Trump burn himself out with trade wars with other countries.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,701
    edited February 27

    How long until the Chinese mega fishing fleets turn up in British Indian Ocean Territory?

    https://x.com/pettitfrontier/status/1894497444303396978

    I'd be more worried about them turning up in the Irish or Portuguese EEZ waters in the North Atlantic, or maybe the Falklands. That's closer to home, and they are already doing Argentine waters.

    They recently started exploiting and fishing out waters disputed between the Falklands and Argentina, in an area known as The Blue Hole. Similar tactics are used in other "gaps" between EEZs in the Pacific.
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/19/falkland-islands-dispute-is-causing-fishing-free-for-all-in-nearby-blue-hole
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/Exclusive_Economic_Zones_by_boundary_type.png

    Portugal's EEZ is a recent development, and the Irish navy is a - metaphorically - a rowing boat and two pedalos. Portugal's massively increased EEZ is very recent, and their increased patrol boat build up (think not too different to River Class) is slow.

    Under Chump the USA has turned decisively against international law, so European countries need to be able to operate on our own. As has been said, the world has changed; so must we.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,701
    stodge said:

    Andy_JS said:

    stodge said:

    The weekly numbers from Techne:

    Lab: 26%, Reform 25%, Con 22%, LD 13%, Green 8%

    No significant changes.

    Find Out Now has Reform five points up on Labour 28% to 23% with the Conservatives on 21%, LDs on 13% and Greens on 10%. They seem to be the best pollsters for both Reform and the Greens - may be a variation on weighting.

    Two Conservative defences, two Liberal Democrat defences and a Labour defence in tonight's round of local by elections. Three counting tonight, two tomorrow morning,

    An interesting one in Westminster / Vincent Square.
    I'd conficdently expect a Conservative win on current polling including recent London local council by elections. However, it will be interesting to see how Reform fare - London hasn't been a strong area for them but a solid third would be respectable.

    As to whether any of this is indicative of what will happen in the 2026 round of local elections in London, I'd suggest not at this stage.
    Vincent Square could be the name of the generic Tory Councillor !
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,129
    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1895253967757836455

    The heel turn from liberal journalists in the U.K. is genuinely extraordinary.

    Donald Trump has gone from being a threat to democracy, and a potential dictator, to giving Starmer his best day in office.

    All in, what, under 4 months?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    Interesting to see a big Government bailout for bankrupt Woking Borough Council.

    The Council was brought to the brink of ruin by years of financial and political mismanagement under successive Conservative-run administrations and Senior Officers who were virtually unaccountable for their actions (and to date, to my understanding, none of either the Councillors responsible at the time or the Senior Officers have been brought to book).

    When the Liberal Democrats took over in 2022 they were forced to make significant cuts to services but now the Government has stepped in with a £96.5 million bailout for 2024/25 and a further £74.9 millon for 2025/26.
  • sladeslade Posts: 2,136
    Con gain in Westminster.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    "Westminster, Vincent Square. Con gain:

    Con 977
    Lab 700
    Reform UK 206
    LD 156
    Green 101
    CPA 14"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,701
    viewcode said:

    MattW said:

    AnneJGP said:

    HYUFD said:

    "U.S. service members who are transgender or otherwise exhibit gender dysphoria are prohibited from military service unless they obtain an exemption, according to an internal Pentagon memo.

    The memo, revealed in a court filing on Wednesday night, details the Trump administration's new policy regarding transgender individuals. The policy notes that such service members "may be considered for a waiver on a case-by-case basis, provided there is a compelling Government interest."'

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pentagon-says-transgender-troops-disqualified-from-service-without-exemption

    That'll give people an easy out if the USA ever needs to introduce conscription.
    The last figure I saw was that this would affect 10-20,000 service people.

    (That's out of around 1.3 million - not sure how accurate I think the number is.)
    Erin Reed quotes SPARTA's estimate of 2941 junior enlisted + 647 junior officers + 10736 senior enlisted + 235 senior officers=14,559 warfighters. About 1% of the total.

    To put that number in context
    14,559 warfighters fired by Trump for being trans
    13,488 warfighter casualties in the 42-country coalition in the Kuwait Gulf War 1990-1991
    3,579 warfighter casualties in the 8 country coalition in Afghanistan 2001-2021
    747 warfighter casualties in the 4 country coalition in the Iraq invasion 2003 (does not include the resultant war)

    Total cost of firing those 14,559 people: $18billion (SPARTA estimate)

    Sources: https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/no-trumps-trans-military-ban-does for the trans figures, Wikipedia for the war estimates.
    Thank-you - so my number is a decent estimate.

    Trump's very much going for people his lifelong mindset identifies as targets.

    See the first senior generals he sacked being the women and blacks, who despite 25 or 35 distinguished year careers are derided amongst his supporters as "DEI hires".

    It's self-imposed jiu-jitsu. His core knuckle-dragging values are his weaknesses.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    edited February 28
    stodge said:

    Interesting to see a big Government bailout for bankrupt Woking Borough Council.

    The Council was brought to the brink of ruin by years of financial and political mismanagement under successive Conservative-run administrations and Senior Officers who were virtually unaccountable for their actions (and to date, to my understanding, none of either the Councillors responsible at the time or the Senior Officers have been brought to book).

    When the Liberal Democrats took over in 2022 they were forced to make significant cuts to services but now the Government has stepped in with a £96.5 million bailout for 2024/25 and a further £74.9 millon for 2025/26.

    I don't understand how things can get to the stage where they're so serious. You'd think there would be checks in place to pick up this sort of problem at an early stage.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    Andy_JS said:

    "Westminster, Vincent Square. Con gain:

    Con 977
    Lab 700
    Reform UK 206
    LD 156
    Green 101
    CPA 14"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2

    Not the biggest surprise in all honesty.

    The Conservative vote not much moved from 2022 which may be a slight worry for the party if it is looking for big gains in 2026. Reform a little disappointing as well but there are better areas in London for them.

    Swing of 5.5% from Labour to Conservative.
  • sladeslade Posts: 2,136
    Lib Dem hold in Westmoreland.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,534
    ...

    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1895253967757836455

    The heel turn from liberal journalists in the U.K. is genuinely extraordinary.

    Donald Trump has gone from being a threat to democracy, and a potential dictator, to giving Starmer his best day in office.

    All in, what, under 4 months?

    For what it's worth I believe you are correct and Starmer had a dreadful day and got utterly rinsed by the orange w*****. He sold his and our souls to Trump and Putin. A day of shame for the UK. Disgusting!

    On the other hand your reliance on Aaron Bastani to prove your point is a little like Farage seeking advice on the Stockport killer's history from Andrew Tate's X account.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,701
    edited February 28
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    I wish I was French

    Imagine France paying a third party for the right for the US to host a base on one of its colonial possessions.
    Imagine a French Leon.

    Léon L'Insupportable.

    He'd fit in perfectly amongst the reactionary ex-colonials on New Caledonia, including the bloviating around the referendum.

    He could spend his declining years as a washed up Clouseau.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    Just found out it's election night in Ontario. Live stream.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TkSeca30VQ
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,188
    Reporter: “Will you be discussing AUKUS?”

    Trump: “What does that mean?”
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,701
    edited February 28
    biggles said:

    viewcode said:

    MattW said:

    AnneJGP said:

    HYUFD said:

    "U.S. service members who are transgender or otherwise exhibit gender dysphoria are prohibited from military service unless they obtain an exemption, according to an internal Pentagon memo.

    The memo, revealed in a court filing on Wednesday night, details the Trump administration's new policy regarding transgender individuals. The policy notes that such service members "may be considered for a waiver on a case-by-case basis, provided there is a compelling Government interest."'

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pentagon-says-transgender-troops-disqualified-from-service-without-exemption

    That'll give people an easy out if the USA ever needs to introduce conscription.
    The last figure I saw was that this would affect 10-20,000 service people.

    (That's out of around 1.3 million - not sure how accurate I think the number is.)
    Erin Reed quotes SPARTA's estimate of 2941 junior enlisted + 647 junior officers + 10736 senior enlisted + 235 senior officers=14,559 warfighters. About 1% of the total.

    To put that number in context
    14,559 warfighters fired by Trump for being trans
    13,488 warfighter casualties in the 42-country coalition in the Kuwait Gulf War 1990-1991
    3,579 warfighter casualties in the 8 country coalition in Afghanistan 2001-2021
    747 warfighter casualties in the 4 country coalition in the Iraq invasion 2003 (does not include the resultant war)

    Total cost of firing those 14,559 people: $18billion (SPARTA estimate)

    Sources: https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/no-trumps-trans-military-ban-does for the trans figures, Wikipedia for the war estimates.
    If Trump wants to fire 15,000 good quality troops, and we need to expand our armed forces…
    There's chatter about refugee programmes for trans people from the USA. I hope our Government is quietly chasing businesses to move here.

    (I checked asylum seekers Canada vs USA and Canada accepts about 10x as many from the USA as vice-versa.)
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,211
    Starmer did well with Trump but, well, who can say whether the fawning trick will pay any dividends. I suspect many on the left will be spitting feathers. Whether it gains enough credit from others will be the key test. I’m genuinely not sure.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,221
    stodge said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Westminster, Vincent Square. Con gain:

    Con 977
    Lab 700
    Reform UK 206
    LD 156
    Green 101
    CPA 14"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2

    Not the biggest surprise in all honesty.

    The Conservative vote not much moved from 2022 which may be a slight worry for the party if it is looking for big gains in 2026. Reform a little disappointing as well but there are better areas in London for them.

    Swing of 5.5% from Labour to Conservative.
    Which nationally would still see the Conservatives gain about 90 seats from Labour, including Cities of London and Westminster.

    Westminster voters are largely too posh and Remain to vote Reform
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    edited February 28
    That was quick. CTV news has called the Ontario election for Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives after about 5 minutes.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,826
    Andy_JS said:

    That was quick. CTV news has called the Ontario election for Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives after about 5 minutes.

    Doug Ford's brother was a very colorful character!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,895
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    That was quick. CTV news has called the Ontario election for Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives after about 5 minutes.

    Doug Ford's brother was a very colorful character!
    Certainly was. Mayor of Toronto.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,129
    A selection of views from Canada about Starmer:

    https://x.com/susandelacourt/status/1895222310791192656

    Ahem, Prime Minister @Keir_Starmer. That was a very good question on Canada and Trump's threats to this country, and with all respect, you blew the answer and threw us under the bus. Not feeling all that Commonwealthy right now.

    https://x.com/levittmichael/status/1895286961600110970

    Watching Keir Starmer’s groveling performance at the White House today was infuriating. At a time when Canada needed real support, he threw us under the bus without hesitation. An absolute disgrace!!

    https://x.com/stphnmaher/status/1895286326246940890

    I had kind of liked him. Now I suddenly despise him.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968
    edited February 28
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Why would Trump back such a terrible deal?

    Because firstly, he's a bit shit at dealmaking, and secondly, and more importantly, he's not paying for it.,
    “he's not paying for it.”

    Are you sure? US have always paid us for our Chagos work before. Matesrates deals on nuclear weaponry.
    The details of our Chagos deal make zero difference to that.
    How do you know? Firstly you don’t have details of the Chagos Deal, and secondly the abstract tie in of mates rates on weaponry won’t even be mentioned in the commons debate or written in the details, wasn’t last time as I can find anywhere. We have to wait for like thirty years or fifty years for document release to piece these things together, to know what we get in return.
    The point is that it's the availability of Diego Garcia that matters to the US.
    How much we end up paying for it is a matter of sublime indifference to Trump.
    How much we end up paying? This time same as last time it’s likely presented to us that UK is overall a financial net gain winners from this Chagos Deal. But having to buy discounted US weaponry to become net winner - as was the case with the 1960s “ethnically cleanse it for us will you?” deal - seems to me like an amusement arcade paying out in tokens, regardless how generous the US discount quite likely is.

    Interesting now suddenly talking about 140 year lease, I reckon this is Trump branding and result of Trump parachuting his own negotiator right into the negotiations a fortnight ago. I had the suspicion Trumps man would make it more expensive for UK and shorter lease, but it could be Mauritius he’s strong arming.

    Anyway, must go now, busy day.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,047

    A selection of views from Canada about Starmer:

    https://x.com/susandelacourt/status/1895222310791192656

    Ahem, Prime Minister @Keir_Starmer. That was a very good question on Canada and Trump's threats to this country, and with all respect, you blew the answer and threw us under the bus. Not feeling all that Commonwealthy right now.

    https://x.com/levittmichael/status/1895286961600110970

    Watching Keir Starmer’s groveling performance at the White House today was infuriating. At a time when Canada needed real support, he threw us under the bus without hesitation. An absolute disgrace!!

    https://x.com/stphnmaher/status/1895286326246940890

    I had kind of liked him. Now I suddenly despise him.

    We should be backing Canada. 100%.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,243

    A selection of views from Canada about Starmer:

    https://x.com/susandelacourt/status/1895222310791192656

    Ahem, Prime Minister @Keir_Starmer. That was a very good question on Canada and Trump's threats to this country, and with all respect, you blew the answer and threw us under the bus. Not feeling all that Commonwealthy right now.

    https://x.com/levittmichael/status/1895286961600110970

    Watching Keir Starmer’s groveling performance at the White House today was infuriating. At a time when Canada needed real support, he threw us under the bus without hesitation. An absolute disgrace!!

    https://x.com/stphnmaher/status/1895286326246940890

    I had kind of liked him. Now I suddenly despise him.

    I did watch the press conference and thought that was the most shameful answer.

    He could have just not answered the question and said 'We have a very strong relationship with Canada and continue to work closely with both them and our European friends" or something and not thrown them under the bus.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,279
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Westminster, Vincent Square. Con gain:

    Con 977
    Lab 700
    Reform UK 206
    LD 156
    Green 101
    CPA 14"

    https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19309/local-council-elections-27th-february?page=2

    Not the biggest surprise in all honesty.

    The Conservative vote not much moved from 2022 which may be a slight worry for the party if it is looking for big gains in 2026. Reform a little disappointing as well but there are better areas in London for them.

    Swing of 5.5% from Labour to Conservative.
    Which nationally would still see the Conservatives gain about 90 seats from Labour, including Cities of London and Westminster.

    Westminster voters are largely too posh and Remain to vote Reform
    Well, if we're going to play the game of extrapolating national GE results from the swing in a single local council by election, let's take the Westmoreland & Furness result with its 7.67% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat which would see 19 Conservative seats fall to the LDs.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,731

    A selection of views from Canada about Starmer:

    https://x.com/susandelacourt/status/1895222310791192656

    Ahem, Prime Minister @Keir_Starmer. That was a very good question on Canada and Trump's threats to this country, and with all respect, you blew the answer and threw us under the bus. Not feeling all that Commonwealthy right now.

    https://x.com/levittmichael/status/1895286961600110970

    Watching Keir Starmer’s groveling performance at the White House today was infuriating. At a time when Canada needed real support, he threw us under the bus without hesitation. An absolute disgrace!!

    https://x.com/stphnmaher/status/1895286326246940890

    I had kind of liked him. Now I suddenly despise him.

    We should be backing Canada. 100%.
    There was silence on here when Trump was attacking Canada previously. It's only when Starmer fails to defend them that it's suddenly an issue.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,322

    glw said:

    Of course the "great trade deal" is a way of keeping us away from the EU.

    So clever on Trump's part.

    Again what we do and what we say to Trump may differ. Nobody in their right mind is going to want to do a trade deal with Trump, such deals are worthless as Canada and Mexico can clearly explain. I suspect we will be doing a lot of deals with the EU and other like minded countries, out of necessity not down to any leaver or remainer ideology. But lets keep the erratic idiot in the Whitehouse smiling as long as we can.
    On the other hand Peter Mandelson would love to be able to take the credit for a UK-US trade deal so I wouldn’t rule it out.
    Trump is more willing to shaft Iowa than other US presidents. But I suspect his team won’t be
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,298
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: right now, McLaren/Norris looking best. But testing is not always a great guide.

    Williams, even accounting for the glory run with less fuel or the engine turned up more, looking promising to fulfill my prediction of them being most improved from 2024.
This discussion has been closed.