Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
And “nazi” to them simply seems to mean European who is hostile to Russia.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
Again I don't know, but I do know our front-of-shop people aren't pushovers.
He's on another planet. On one hand the Tories want to abolish food banks because "scroungers" should just get a job. On the other hand we get "do they have" TVs - so they should have to sell it to Cash Converters first? Internet - as you can't access most government services without the internet this is beyond stupid Cars - again, is the proposal that it should be forcibly sold first? Alcohol & Cigarettes - because people who need a food bank to eat have a bottle of Lambrini and 40 Lambets? Holidays - an awful lot of people don't have those Meals Out - hospitality is having a terrible time as people are skint. Go ask anyone in the trade who isn't a high end restaurant how business is
Tories think poor people are scroungers who need to be further punished. Reform think poor people are target voters who are the victims of the system. Which is why the polling trend has Reform looking likely to hoover up votes in places briefly won by the Tories until they realised they were being blamed for the mess they were in by the people they'd voted for to rescue them from it.
On topic, @Dura_Ace asked the valid question on the end of the last thread - how many of the younger people attracted to Reform will actually turn out and vote for them?
The graveyard of any political movement is reliance on non-voters. They're called non-voters because they're disengaged from politics and don't vote.
Until something engages them. As Brexit did. I then saw the same floods of voters voting for Boris in 2019.
These are practiced non-voters, and they can be motivated enough to vote. The Grauniad piece talks about young voters. People who haven't yet had non-voting ingrained into their psyche. These people absolutely will vote if they think there is something worth voting for.
And they don't care one bit about Rupert Lowe.
As the final line of that article said it is actually the middle aged where Reform do best ie ages 30 to 70 not the young. Indeed even the Greens and Tories and LDs outpoll Reform with under 30s still, albeit Reform have made some gains with young men but young women hate Farage still.
Hence overall Labour still lead with the young, the Tories with pensioners and Reform with the middle aged. Hence our three way politics now
You are doing you usual problem of looking at today as if today will be tomorrow.
Take the trend, project it forwards. We don't care what the polls say about an election tomorrow we're not going to have. We care about the trends played forward to the point where we actually do get an election. If you don't that's up to you. Your party used to be good at understanding the basics of political strategy. What happened?
The trend being Reform are making gains amongst the middle aged most as I said and smaller gains amongst over 65s, despite some gains with young men even the Tories have made bigger gains with under 25s than Reform since the last GE
Ah, that's what happened.
You want to remain blissfully ignorant of what is going on? No problem! That's how you lose to a party that gets a third of the vote and a majority of 174.
Listen to what people are saying. Listen to what your former voters are saying. Your former donors. Go and speak to people in the Real World - the ones who know how bad the economy is and long since stopped listening to whatever spin you disingenuously tried to present as the truth.
What we know about young voters and dispossessed voters is that the pollsters barely know they exist. You are being hammered in the polls - down to third and sliding and have come on here claiming you are doing better than the party in first gaining ground?
There are two realities. The political bubble, where actually people like you actually can haughtily dictate to actual people how their lives actually are actually, and then there is lived reality.
In the real world, voters not only aren't listening to you, they don't care what you say. They *are* listening to Reform, because Reform are listening to them. Our country needs the Tories to wake up and start connecting with voters again, because unless you do we get Reform. And you saying that actually no we don't actually just makes Reform even more likely to happen.
No poll forecasts a Reform majority, at most Farage could become PM with Kemi’s support.
You also forget most Tory voters would prefer Reform in government to another Labour government.
Left liberals like you may despise Farage but unless you tactically vote Tory in seats where the Tories were first and Reform second at the last general election like mine then your lectures mean nothing. Labour will lose its red wall seats to Reform most likely regardless anyway
Your views seem entirely based on current opinion polls. Sometimes that's right and means you can actually listen to what people are saying rather than drown it out with your own biases. On this though I think you're wrong. Reform have demonstrated time and time again that they don't have the structure and discipline to break through as a serious party. They massively underperformed their vote share at the last election and I don't see anything that suggests they won't do so again. This whole Rupert Lowe farce just proves this. Farage for all of his skills as a public personality is a terrible party leader who can barely be bothered to fulfil that function. To succeed they need good candidate selection, strong party organisation and a way of turning supporters into activists. I don't see any signs of that whatsoever.
At the last general election Reform got 14% which via FPTP gets them less than 10 seats. Now Reform are polling around 25% which with Labour and the Tories on a similar voteshare gets them around 100 to 150 seats, especially in seats Leave won in 2016 by 60% or more
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
According to polling just before the war, these areas would vote heavily to remain Ukrainian. Just because you are "Russian", doesn't mean you are owned by Russia.
Or do you believe that people of Indian heritage, living permanently in the UK, are the property of India?
On topic, @Dura_Ace asked the valid question on the end of the last thread - how many of the younger people attracted to Reform will actually turn out and vote for them?
The graveyard of any political movement is reliance on non-voters. They're called non-voters because they're disengaged from politics and don't vote.
Until something engages them. As Brexit did. I then saw the same floods of voters voting for Boris in 2019.
These are practiced non-voters, and they can be motivated enough to vote. The Grauniad piece talks about young voters. People who haven't yet had non-voting ingrained into their psyche. These people absolutely will vote if they think there is something worth voting for.
And they don't care one bit about Rupert Lowe.
As the final line of that article said it is actually the middle aged where Reform do best ie ages 30 to 70 not the young. Indeed even the Greens and Tories and LDs outpoll Reform with under 30s still, albeit Reform have made some gains with young men but young women hate Farage still.
Hence overall Labour still lead with the young, the Tories with pensioners and Reform with the middle aged. Hence our three way politics now
You are doing you usual problem of looking at today as if today will be tomorrow.
Take the trend, project it forwards. We don't care what the polls say about an election tomorrow we're not going to have. We care about the trends played forward to the point where we actually do get an election. If you don't that's up to you. Your party used to be good at understanding the basics of political strategy. What happened?
The trend being Reform are making gains amongst the middle aged most as I said and smaller gains amongst over 65s, despite some gains with young men even the Tories have made bigger gains with under 25s than Reform since the last GE
Ah, that's what happened.
You want to remain blissfully ignorant of what is going on? No problem! That's how you lose to a party that gets a third of the vote and a majority of 174.
Listen to what people are saying. Listen to what your former voters are saying. Your former donors. Go and speak to people in the Real World - the ones who know how bad the economy is and long since stopped listening to whatever spin you disingenuously tried to present as the truth.
What we know about young voters and dispossessed voters is that the pollsters barely know they exist. You are being hammered in the polls - down to third and sliding and have come on here claiming you are doing better than the party in first gaining ground?
There are two realities. The political bubble, where actually people like you actually can haughtily dictate to actual people how their lives actually are actually, and then there is lived reality.
In the real world, voters not only aren't listening to you, they don't care what you say. They *are* listening to Reform, because Reform are listening to them. Our country needs the Tories to wake up and start connecting with voters again, because unless you do we get Reform. And you saying that actually no we don't actually just makes Reform even more likely to happen.
No poll forecasts a Reform majority, at most Farage could become PM with Kemi’s support.
You also forget most Tory voters would prefer Reform in government to another Labour government.
Left liberals like you may despise Farage but unless you tactically vote Tory in seats where the Tories were first and Reform second at the last general election like mine then your lectures mean nothing. Labour will lose its red wall seats to Reform most likely regardless anyway
Your views seem entirely based on current opinion polls. Sometimes that's right and means you can actually listen to what people are saying rather than drown it out with your own biases. On this though I think you're wrong. Reform have demonstrated time and time again that they don't have the structure and discipline to break through as a serious party. They massively underperformed their vote share at the last election and I don't see anything that suggests they won't do so again. This whole Rupert Lowe farce just proves this. Farage for all of his skills as a public personality is a terrible party leader who can barely be bothered to fulfil that function. To succeed they need good candidate selection, strong party organisation and a way of turning supporters into activists. I don't see any signs of that whatsoever.
There are plenty of signs of it - they're well funded thanks to all their new donors and they're hiring staff to organise.
The problem is that they're still very new, many of the people on board at the start are bonkers and many of the newer people on board are new to politics. So it is happening, under the surface.
And remember this. With social media they are able to connect to their voters in ways that other parties and their activists have no concept of. Unless you're active on the likes of TikTok of course you can't see what they are up to. But their voters can...
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
According to polling just before the war, these areas would vote heavily to remain Ukrainian. Just because you are "Russian", doesn't mean you are owned by Russia.
Or do you believe that people of Indian heritage, living permanently in the UK, are the property of India?
Millions of British nationals live abroad. Does that give us a claim to the places they live in?
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
Ask the average voter if they think their taxes should fund the TVs, phones, pub meals and trips to Benidorm of those on benefits and the answer would not be one you like
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
You might have forgotten that it is increasingly necessary to have a smartphone (at the least) just to deal with DWP - or HMG at all - and that means buying a new one every 3 years or so if it is to be secure at all. Ditto operating the necessary bank account.
That's under the policies of Conservative administrations (with a little help from the Libs to begin with) over 14 years,.
Libraries and job centres have computers with internet access
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Universal Basic Income. Give every adult their tax free allowance as cash from the government. We're given a grand a month. Any money you earn is taxed. So we hugely simplify the tax system. We don't need means tested "benefits" as we're all getting them, so we can hugely simplify social security. The sick and disabled who need more support get it based on their need, not their income.
A vast array of painful pointless bureaucracy removed, and people can have enough money to live on. Which means money circulates through our economy - shops, hospitality and businesses actually have customers. Which creates jobs and investment. We take all of the stresses of money away and people live happier lives, less broken families etc etc etc.
The key challenge is to remove the mentality that these are "benefits". Pay it to everyone and hopefully this issue can no longer be weaponised by the right to set the poor against the poorer for the benefit of the ultra rich.
It would only work if you stopped all other benefits.
And that would never happen as there would be demands for payments for X and allowances for Y.
Within a few years the system would be an even more convoluted mess and with higher marginal taxes for those that did work.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
The default Tory answer. Cancel Netflix. Mind you Liz Kendall's Labour aren't any better.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Apparently he thinks Vlad is being perfectly reasonable in bombing Ukraine and "anyone" would do the same?
You just know Trump himself would love to start firing missiles into Ukraine if he could...
He's doing the next best thing, in preventing Ukraine from knowing when and where Russia will strike and then preventing missiles from destroying incoming attacks to Ukraine.
Perhaps the Nobel Committee could award a prize for the Worst Person on the Planet.
Joint winners in 2025: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Except the MAGA crowd would rejoice that "He won a Nobel Prize!"
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
Again I don't know, but I do know our front-of-shop people aren't pushovers.
He's on another planet. On one hand the Tories want to abolish food banks because "scroungers" should just get a job. On the other hand we get "do they have" TVs - so they should have to sell it to Cash Converters first? Internet - as you can't access most government services without the internet this is beyond stupid Cars - again, is the proposal that it should be forcibly sold first? Alcohol & Cigarettes - because people who need a food bank to eat have a bottle of Lambrini and 40 Lambets? Holidays - an awful lot of people don't have those Meals Out - hospitality is having a terrible time as people are skint. Go ask anyone in the trade who isn't a high end restaurant how business is
Tories think poor people are scroungers who need to be further punished. Reform think poor people are target voters who are the victims of the system. Which is why the polling trend has Reform looking likely to hoover up votes in places briefly won by the Tories until they realised they were being blamed for the mess they were in by the people they'd voted for to rescue them from it.
Wrong on both counts, even Rees Mogg is a great fan of food banks as voluntary sector charity not state funded welfare.
Second, unlike the Tories Reform want US style welfare and their official policy is that only those who have contributed via National Insurance when in work should get unemployment benefits
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
You might have forgotten that it is increasingly necessary to have a smartphone (at the least) just to deal with DWP - or HMG at all - and that means buying a new one every 3 years or so if it is to be secure at all. Ditto operating the necessary bank account.
That's under the policies of Conservative administrations (with a little help from the Libs to begin with) over 14 years,.
Libraries and job centres have computers with internet access
AIUI, when they give you an appointment for your phone interview, they don't ask when it will be convenient either for you or for the local library.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Apparently he thinks Vlad is being perfectly reasonable in bombing Ukraine and "anyone" would do the same?
You just know Trump himself would love to start firing missiles into Ukraine if he could...
He's doing the next best thing, in preventing Ukraine from knowing when and where Russia will strike and then preventing missiles from destroying incoming attacks to Ukraine.
Perhaps the Nobel Committee could award a prize for the Worst Person on the Planet.
Joint winners in 2025: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Except the MAGA crowd would rejoice that "He won a Nobel Prize!"
The Nobel war prize, for advancements in warfare, would actually be more in keeping with the other prizes which are awarded for research and the advancement of knowledge. Ukraine and Russia could be jointly awarded for breakthroughs in drone technology.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
No, you are right the current Administration have a shit load of Democratic Party grandees to execute before Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbatd, Waltz and Rubio meet their maker. Why no RFK Junior on the list? He's going to do more damage than all the rest of them put together.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Hatred is the only emotion most people can have at this stage . And it sickens me that the UK has to continue to play this game of the “ US is our ally “ .
At some point and I expect this will be soon the UK will have to make a choice .
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
You might have forgotten that it is increasingly necessary to have a smartphone (at the least) just to deal with DWP - or HMG at all - and that means buying a new one every 3 years or so if it is to be secure at all. Ditto operating the necessary bank account.
That's under the policies of Conservative administrations (with a little help from the Libs to begin with) over 14 years,.
Libraries and job centres have computers with internet access
AIUI, when they give you an appointment for your phone interview, they don't ask when it will be convenient either for you or for the local library.
And how do they tell you? By text or email. Not post. Under the policies brought in by the Tories to force everyone to go digital.
Makes sense to me. There's definitely been an attempt to be a bit more Trump on sections of the right, I guess in part because it is more energetic and bullish than the otherwise despondent and irrelevant Badenochian Tories, but I think they also believe they are super popular.
Recent happenings that reveal the 🇬🇧 national “populist” right is ~as out of touch with the British public as the woke/Corbynite/“populist” new left was:
👉English as static, ethno-nationalist category 👉Trump as in sync with the British public 👉Rupert Lowe as popular Agent Of Change
Both the new left populists (A), and the national populist right (B) identified genuine, widespread public antagonisms towards: A) rigged/broken economic model; and unlimited migration & liberal overreach.
@Stuartinromford Practical MAGA would recognise that the USA is stronger with a powerful network of allies, than without it.
I'm unsure how many MAGA think that way. The problem is, I only get to see what they say on t'Internet, and it seems they take Team America to be a playbook, not a parody. America's the best country in the world, and everyone needs to bow down to them.
The effects of Trump and the sentiments appearing from the transatlantic earthquake take time to percolate through the electorate. Most people don't follow news the way we do and it takes months for events to take hold and impact voting behaviour. I suspect. Reforms numbers are going to drop as people think through what they have stood for over the last years (policies that have weakened us economically and in terms of defense) and as people see the effect of the DOGE/Truss style economic collapse in the US. I also look forward to the next yougov and Statista brexit polls. I suspect leve is i. For a further bloodbath.
The London summit shows that predictions that Brexit would render the UK irrelevant were categorically wrong.
Hahahaha I can barely bother responding. Do you comprehend how exposed we are. There are three major economic blocks: USA, BRICS and the EU. If you are not one of those, you are dog meat. Totally exposed. Running Putin's errands for him eh. Our sovereignity is more in perril now than in the EU. Look at our nuclear deterrent... totally in trumps pocket. And Starmer having to kiss a ring... and you lot screaming about sovereignity because of hoover engine sizes and standardization of USB cables. Now you probably support Trumps Canada and Greenland claims and supporting Russian aggressive war in the ukraine. What is to stop Trump calling for Britain to join the US next? The cognitive dissonance you inhabit is astounding.
So according to you, almost every non-Chinese Asian economy is "dog meat"?
You don't know what the BRICS are do you.... you have very strong opinions for somebody who is so ill informed.
Oh please...
The BRICS doesn't include countries like Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, and slightly further afield, Australia and New Zealand. They're all "dog meat", are they?
Your knowledge of international relations is woeful. I recomment you look up ASEAN, which falls under the US defense.
The effects of Trump and the sentiments appearing from the transatlantic earthquake take time to percolate through the electorate. Most people don't follow news the way we do and it takes months for events to take hold and impact voting behaviour. I suspect. Reforms numbers are going to drop as people think through what they have stood for over the last years (policies that have weakened us economically and in terms of defense) and as people see the effect of the DOGE/Truss style economic collapse in the US. I also look forward to the next yougov and Statista brexit polls. I suspect leve is i. For a further bloodbath.
The London summit shows that predictions that Brexit would render the UK irrelevant were categorically wrong.
Hahahaha I can barely bother responding. Do you comprehend how exposed we are. There are three major economic blocks: USA, BRICS and the EU. If you are not one of those, you are dog meat. Totally exposed. Running Putin's errands for him eh. Our sovereignity is more in perril now than in the EU. Look at our nuclear deterrent... totally in trumps pocket. And Starmer having to kiss a ring... and you lot screaming about sovereignity because of hoover engine sizes and standardization of USB cables. Now you probably support Trumps Canada and Greenland claims and supporting Russian aggressive war in the ukraine. What is to stop Trump calling for Britain to join the US next? The cognitive dissonance you inhabit is astounding.
So according to you, almost every non-Chinese Asian economy is "dog meat"?
You don't know what the BRICS are do you.... you have very strong opinions for somebody who is so ill informed.
Oh please...
The BRICS doesn't include countries like Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, and slightly further afield, Australia and New Zealand. They're all "dog meat", are they?
Your knowledge of international relations is woeful. I recomment you look up ASEAN, which falls under the US defense.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Russia has failed to invade Ukraine. Their demands for what happens in the remainder of it should be dismissed. I think what's left of independent Ukraine should certainly join the EU, and (though I don’t currently see how) NATO. Russia can't complain that NATO is on its borders when it has artificially moved those borders.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
According to polling just before the war, these areas would vote heavily to remain Ukrainian. Just because you are "Russian", doesn't mean you are owned by Russia.
Or do you believe that people of Indian heritage, living permanently in the UK, are the property of India?
Not entirely true. That poll had 45% of those in East Ukraine saying Russians and Ukrainians are one people compared to just 28% in Ukraine overall
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
Ask the average voter if they think their taxes should fund the TVs, phones, pub meals and trips to Benidorm of those on benefits and the answer would not be one you like
My church has a house which is not used for a vicar, so it's rented out. The rent as originally agreed continues to cover our costs, but every year the letting agent tells us the "market" would bear £X more - increasing every year.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
According to polling just before the war, these areas would vote heavily to remain Ukrainian. Just because you are "Russian", doesn't mean you are owned by Russia.
Or do you believe that people of Indian heritage, living permanently in the UK, are the property of India?
Not entirely true. That poll had 45% of those in East Ukraine saying Russians and Ukrainians are one people compared to just 28% in Ukraine overall
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
On topic, @Dura_Ace asked the valid question on the end of the last thread - how many of the younger people attracted to Reform will actually turn out and vote for them?
The graveyard of any political movement is reliance on non-voters. They're called non-voters because they're disengaged from politics and don't vote.
Until something engages them. As Brexit did. I then saw the same floods of voters voting for Boris in 2019.
These are practiced non-voters, and they can be motivated enough to vote. The Grauniad piece talks about young voters. People who haven't yet had non-voting ingrained into their psyche. These people absolutely will vote if they think there is something worth voting for.
And they don't care one bit about Rupert Lowe.
As the final line of that article said it is actually the middle aged where Reform do best ie ages 30 to 70 not the young. Indeed even the Greens and Tories and LDs outpoll Reform with under 30s still, albeit Reform have made some gains with young men but young women hate Farage still.
Hence overall Labour still lead with the young, the Tories with pensioners and Reform with the middle aged. Hence our three way politics now
You are doing you usual problem of looking at today as if today will be tomorrow.
Take the trend, project it forwards. We don't care what the polls say about an election tomorrow we're not going to have. We care about the trends played forward to the point where we actually do get an election. If you don't that's up to you. Your party used to be good at understanding the basics of political strategy. What happened?
The trend being Reform are making gains amongst the middle aged most as I said and smaller gains amongst over 65s, despite some gains with young men even the Tories have made bigger gains with under 25s than Reform since the last GE
Ah, that's what happened.
You want to remain blissfully ignorant of what is going on? No problem! That's how you lose to a party that gets a third of the vote and a majority of 174.
Listen to what people are saying. Listen to what your former voters are saying. Your former donors. Go and speak to people in the Real World - the ones who know how bad the economy is and long since stopped listening to whatever spin you disingenuously tried to present as the truth.
What we know about young voters and dispossessed voters is that the pollsters barely know they exist. You are being hammered in the polls - down to third and sliding and have come on here claiming you are doing better than the party in first gaining ground?
There are two realities. The political bubble, where actually people like you actually can haughtily dictate to actual people how their lives actually are actually, and then there is lived reality.
In the real world, voters not only aren't listening to you, they don't care what you say. They *are* listening to Reform, because Reform are listening to them. Our country needs the Tories to wake up and start connecting with voters again, because unless you do we get Reform. And you saying that actually no we don't actually just makes Reform even more likely to happen.
No poll forecasts a Reform majority, at most Farage could become PM with Kemi’s support.
You also forget most Tory voters would prefer Reform in government to another Labour government.
Left liberals like you may despise Farage but unless you tactically vote Tory in seats where the Tories were first and Reform second at the last general election like mine then your lectures mean nothing. Labour will lose its red wall seats to Reform most likely regardless anyway
Your views seem entirely based on current opinion polls. Sometimes that's right and means you can actually listen to what people are saying rather than drown it out with your own biases. On this though I think you're wrong. Reform have demonstrated time and time again that they don't have the structure and discipline to break through as a serious party. They massively underperformed their vote share at the last election and I don't see anything that suggests they won't do so again. This whole Rupert Lowe farce just proves this. Farage for all of his skills as a public personality is a terrible party leader who can barely be bothered to fulfil that function. To succeed they need good candidate selection, strong party organisation and a way of turning supporters into activists. I don't see any signs of that whatsoever.
At the last general election Reform got 14% which via FPTP gets them less than 10 seats. Now Reform are polling around 25% which with Labour and the Tories on a similar voteshare gets them around 100 to 150 seats, especially in seats Leave won in 2016 by 60% or more
But again this is entirely based on extrapolation from opinion polls. You have to make sure a good proportion of those people who say they favour Reform actually vote
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
Ask the average voter if they think their taxes should fund the TVs, phones, pub meals and trips to Benidorm of those on benefits and the answer would not be one you like
My church has a house which is not used for a vicar, so it's rented out. The rent as originally agreed continues to cover our costs, but every year the letting agent tells us the "market" would bear £X more - increasing every year.
So? The house is owned by the church not the state
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
Someone wrote, “could care less” on this site yesterday.
After this phase of the war I expect we may see a new iron curtain of minefields, fortifications and closed borders from Estonia to the Black sea.
Plus observation drones flying at 5,000m. It will be back to the "outlast Russia" to replace "outlast the USSR".
The Uke's are working towards a 15km zone of drones over the Russian side of the front line effectively to prevent any movement, and whack anything that appears.
In the late 70s on a German Exchange I visited the iron curtain. Literally a field fence at the end of a street, then a high security fence, then a dog patrol track, a sand strip (show footprints), then minefields and the whole panoply including watchtowers.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
According to polling just before the war, these areas would vote heavily to remain Ukrainian. Just because you are "Russian", doesn't mean you are owned by Russia.
Or do you believe that people of Indian heritage, living permanently in the UK, are the property of India?
Not entirely true. That poll had 45% of those in East Ukraine saying Russians and Ukrainians are one people compared to just 28% in Ukraine overall
Saying that you are “one people” doesn’t mean that you belong to another state.
Many Indian people in the U.K. celebrate their heritage. That doesn’t mean that they want Walthamstow annexed by India.
Hence 16/18% in the Easternmost areas saying that Ukraine and Russia should be one country. In that poll.
Quibble but even if the Democrats won Congress next year and the Presidency in 2028 Putin wouldn’t withdraw his troops from the regions of Ukraine he now occupies. Nor would the US send military arms sent to Ukraine again and by so much that Ukraine could actually force Russia out of all Ukraine as that would risk a nuclear war with Putin
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
Lavrov has actually made it clear that the Russians are demanding far, far more than that.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Hatred is the only emotion most people can have at this stage . And it sickens me that the UK has to continue to play this game of the “ US is our ally “ .
At some point and I expect this will be soon the UK will have to make a choice .
To quote Eisenhower " the time has come to shit or get off the pot".
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
Ask the average voter if they think their taxes should fund the TVs, phones, pub meals and trips to Benidorm of those on benefits and the answer would not be one you like
My church has a house which is not used for a vicar, so it's rented out. The rent as originally agreed continues to cover our costs, but every year the letting agent tells us the "market" would bear £X more - increasing every year.
So? The house is owned by the church not the state
So we are a private landlord and that is what many private landlords are doing - maximising their returns, as they're entitled to do. But what the market will bear and what present tenants can afford are not the same thing. Tenants are being priced out. We all know the country desperately needs more housing.
I wouldn't build a strategy that relies on things not going wrong with Trump.
What else can SKS do though? If he picks a fight with DJT he'll get fucked with tarrifs and bricked F-35s. Gargling those droopy orange nuts are his only option. He does appear to be quite good at it, so that's a bonus.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
I'd be ok with Guantanamo.
If Trump sees your 2024 Presidential Election positions you may well get it!
On topic, since every recent thread is about my MP .
The Leeanderthal Man vs Rupert 'Mare (longish, but that's them not me). Handbags at dawn. But seemingly not remembering that this is about bullying, and staff who allege such, should be at the centre of this:
At Reform UK we have a monumental task on our hands in order to save our country.
There is a huge amount of pressure on Nigel and our team to deliver for the British public. I did not come into politics for personal gain, like my colleagues I stepped forward because I wanted to help save my country.
Joining Reform UK is the best thing I have ever done in politics and this is our last chance to turn things around in our country. But politics is a team game and we must work as a team. I was the first ever Reform UK MP and my first loyalty will always be to my country. I have a great deal of respect for Rupert Lowe and as his Chief Whip I have bent over backwards to be fair with him since he entered Parliament.
But his unwillingness to cooperate in an investigation into his behaviour has meant the Parliamentary party cannot function effectively whilst Rupert is a Reform UK MP.
There is far too much at stake and by not taking decisive action we would risk losing everything we have built up.
I bare no malice towards Rupert and to remove the whip was a deeply painful thing to do, but delivering for our country must come first and no man is bigger than our party.
Lee Anderson, Chief Whip
Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 Lee. What you have said is simply not true. I have spoken to the KC multiple times over the last week. She has confirmed again and again that no credible evidence against me has been provided to her by you or the party. I must have had ten different conversations with her.
To say I have not cooperated is false. That is an outright lie.
Launching this vindictive assault before an investigation has even started is quite frankly pathetic.
Our members, supporters and country deserve so much better than this.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
Someone wrote, “could care less” on this site yesterday.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
I'd be ok with Guantanamo.
Heck, I'd be OK with them fleeing by helicopter to a remote island where that have lots of money and nothing to spend it on, absolute power but nobody else to exert that power over.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
Ask the average voter if they think their taxes should fund the TVs, phones, pub meals and trips to Benidorm of those on benefits and the answer would not be one you like
My church has a house which is not used for a vicar, so it's rented out. The rent as originally agreed continues to cover our costs, but every year the letting agent tells us the "market" would bear £X more - increasing every year.
So? The house is owned by the church not the state
So we are a private landlord and that is what many private landlords are doing - maximising their returns, as they're entitled to do. But what the market will bear and what present tenants can afford are not the same thing. Tenants are being priced out. We all know the country desperately needs more housing.
Which may be an argument for more social and affordable homes as the government is pushing for hundreds of thousands of new homes a year. It is not an argument for ever higher benefits
I wouldn't build a strategy that relies on things not going wrong with Trump.
What else can SKS do though? If he picks a fight with DJT he'll get fucked with tarrifs and bricked F-35s. Gargling those droopy orange nuts are his only option. He does appear to be quite good at it, so that's a bonus.
I personally see a 3rd way whereby he doesn't do the cathartic Hugh Grant but neither does he (and here I can't improve) "gargle those droopy orange nuts".
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Is that because of food prices or because of housing costs ?
I don't know, being a back-office person. It's true that there's are a lot more things these days that are effectively essentials - the days when people could just not spend money on what would have been considered "non-essentials" have gone. And I don't mean Sky packages etc.
When I was young, if you had rent, clothes, food, fuel & household sundries you were OK; you could walk or cycle to work. Nowadays, not so much.
Whereabouts are you (as I can't remember). I'm seeing on Reddit an awful lot of people down South being kicked out of their rental homes only to discover that the new market rents are well beyond the level they can afford...
South west. People are in difficulties with finding affordable rental properties, e.g an elderly and ill couple sofa-surfing with relations who treat them like servants. But what can the council do? They have to deal with the highest-priority people first.
Rule 1 when being kicked out of your private rented house / flat - don’t move until the court appointed bailiffs arrive. Then keep the paperwork as you head to the council to get them to house you
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
Someone wrote, “could care less” on this site yesterday.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
Lavrov has actually made it clear that the Russians are demanding far, far more than that.
I don't see why so many people seem to ignore what Putin, Lavrov and Russian media say about their aims. They've made it quite clear what they want, yet many people over here seem to be in denial.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
I would settle for viewing them both as foreign countries.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
With the knowledge (and hope!) that the US might be easier turned back onto a good path than Russia.
I wouldn't build a strategy that relies on things not going wrong with Trump.
What else can SKS do though? If he picks a fight with DJT he'll get fucked with tarrifs and bricked F-35s. Gargling those droopy orange nuts are his only option. He does appear to be quite good at it, so that's a bonus.
I personally see a 3rd way whereby he doesn't do the cathartic Hugh Grant but neither does he (and here I can't improve) "gargle those droopy orange nuts".
Though if anyone is likely to have had a nutsack tuck it’s the Donald.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Do they have TVs, internet, cars, phones, alcohol, cigarettes, holidays, meals out etc? If so then their incomes probably cover the basic essentials of food and drink, clothing and accommodation, just the food bank helps them afford relative luxuries
That was a party political broadcast on behalf of vote for anyone other than the Tories.
Is it possible for you to be any more disconnected from how people live? Its no wonder you lot are getting reamed by Reform.
Ask the average voter if they think their taxes should fund the TVs, phones, pub meals and trips to Benidorm of those on benefits and the answer would not be one you like
My church has a house which is not used for a vicar, so it's rented out. The rent as originally agreed continues to cover our costs, but every year the letting agent tells us the "market" would bear £X more - increasing every year.
So? The house is owned by the church not the state
So we are a private landlord and that is what many private landlords are doing - maximising their returns, as they're entitled to do. But what the market will bear and what present tenants can afford are not the same thing. Tenants are being priced out. We all know the country desperately needs more housing.
Which may be an argument for more social and affordable homes as the government is pushing for hundreds of thousands of new homes a year. It is not an argument for ever higher benefits
I didn't say it was. I don't know what the solutions are. I've read that housing benefit may even cause rents to increase.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
I'd be ok with Guantanamo.
Heck, I'd be OK with them fleeing by helicopter to a remote island where that have lots of money and nothing to spend it on, absolute power but nobody else to exert that power over.
Seems expensive to arrange just for PBers who slip into sloppy American spellings at times.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
I would settle for viewing them both as foreign countries.
Well, they are both 'foreign'.
But we have a heck of a lot in common with the USA - and far more than we do with Russia. I can see why it is in Putin's interests to have us in Europe disengage with the USA, but there is still chance and opportunities for the US to realise what a series of horrible mistakes it is making.
But there's no way I feel as deeply negative about the USA as I do about Russia. We expect Russia to do deeply bad or evil stuff; we expect better of our friends.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
Someone wrote, “could care less” on this site yesterday.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
No they only fully occupy Crimea. The rest are divided. He wants more than the current front lines.
The more I read up about America's new feudal court, the more I think that Peter Thiel has received far, far too little coverage in the media.
He seems to be essentially the kingmaker, bringing Musk back to Trump, his longstanding ally, and simultaneously the key person who links Musk, Vance and Trump to the ideologues like Yarvin.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
I'd be ok with Guantanamo.
Heck, I'd be OK with them fleeing by helicopter to a remote island where that have lots of money and nothing to spend it on, absolute power but nobody else to exert that power over.
And to keep going - I'd actually be ok with some proper domestic resistance (Congress, Courts, States, Civil) followed by a Dem landslide in the midterms.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
No they only fully occupy Crimea. The rest are divided. He wants more than the current front lines.
As I said, full control of those five regions but not necessarily all Ukraine
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
I would settle for viewing them both as foreign countries.
Well, they are both 'foreign'.
But we have a heck of a lot in common with the USA - and far more than we do with Russia. I can see why it is in Putin's interests to have us in Europe disengage with the USA, but there is still chance and opportunities for the US to realise what a series of horrible mistakes it is making.
But there's no way I feel as deeply negative about the USA as I do about Russia. We expect Russia to do deeply bad or evil stuff; we expect better of our friends.
They are both foreign countries, and we should aim to be friendly most of the time, but be independent from both. We are not independent from the US at present. Our defence is wholly intertwined, and our foreign and even latterly our domestic politics has been controlled by them. That was widely nodded sagely away by PB's shrewdie contingent as 'just the way things work nowadays' or words to that effect, indeed to question it too much was ironically itself deemed a form of treachery, to 'the West'. Now those idiots are finding a radical leader who is less to their liking has been elected and they are scrambling around wishing we had more autonomy and bleating that the 'US is not our friend'. They may not be our friend but they are still our boss. Perhaps they'll learn a lesson from this, though I have my doubts.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
No they only fully occupy Crimea. The rest are divided. He wants more than the current front lines.
As I said, full control of those five regions but not necessarily all Ukraine
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
You’ve never been in a serious negotiation have you?
Yes it’s a strategy. But it’s a strategy that will optimise the outcome for Russia
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
No they only fully occupy Crimea. The rest are divided. He wants more than the current front lines.
As I said, full control of those five regions but not necessarily all Ukraine
Ukraine controls half of Kherson, half of Zapo, and half of Donetsk. You are surrendering not just the Russian Russian occupied area, but about the same again.
The effects of Trump and the sentiments appearing from the transatlantic earthquake take time to percolate through the electorate. Most people don't follow news the way we do and it takes months for events to take hold and impact voting behaviour. I suspect. Reforms numbers are going to drop as people think through what they have stood for over the last years (policies that have weakened us economically and in terms of defense) and as people see the effect of the DOGE/Truss style economic collapse in the US. I also look forward to the next yougov and Statista brexit polls. I suspect leve is i. For a further bloodbath.
The London summit shows that predictions that Brexit would render the UK irrelevant were categorically wrong.
where have you been for the past 10 years? we only regained relevance because the US have gone round the twist
This guy is a post op lobotomy patient
Actually that description applies far more accurately to those seeing this current crisis as some excuse for rejoining the EU. If the crisis shows us anything it is that tying yourself to monolithic blocs is a stupid idea.
Close cooperation without political straitjackets is the future.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
Only if he actually invaded Canada, Greenland and Panama would Trump be at Putin’s level.
Though as like Putin he has nuclear weapons there isn’t a huge amount we could do about it other than bring Canada and Greenland under the British and French nuclear missile umbrella before to put him off.
Had Ukraine been allowed to keep the nuclear weapons it had in the 1990s Putin wouldn’t have invaded now
I wouldn't build a strategy that relies on things not going wrong with Trump.
What else can SKS do though? If he picks a fight with DJT he'll get fucked with tarrifs and bricked F-35s. Gargling those droopy orange nuts are his only option. He does appear to be quite good at it, so that's a bonus.
I personally see a 3rd way whereby he doesn't do the cathartic Hugh Grant but neither does he (and here I can't improve) "gargle those droopy orange nuts".
Though if anyone is likely to have had a nutsack tuck it’s the Donald.
I wonder if the Ozempic helps there. Depends what it shrinks, I suppose.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
No they only fully occupy Crimea. The rest are divided. He wants more than the current front lines.
As I said, full control of those five regions but not necessarily all Ukraine
Ukraine controls half of Kherson, half of Zapo, and half of Donetsk. You are surrendering not just the Russian Russian occupied arena, but about the same again.
Russia controls around 20% of the land area of Ukraine, ceding the remainder of Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Donetsk oblasts per Russia's demands would lose around 3% further land area, not to mention the two cities of more than 1 million people combined.
Not entirely true given new Trump sanctions on Russia. It is more a question of where the territorial boundaries go in a ceasefire, even Trump is not giving Russia all of Ukraine
The US is supplying Russia with intelligence, while doing all it can to undermine the Ukrainians.
Stunning that we are writing sentences like this, even though seems true.
Just incredible that the US can be turned to support a sworn enemy of decades standing on the say so of one man.
Obama pushed for military cooperation with Russia and called them a strategic partner over Iran.
I don't think he has gone all in on the Russian side. The negotiation with Russia hasn't started - he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first. This undermining of their position is to secure that. It's a lot more than I would be comfortable doing, but it's a sort of strategy.
"he's decided he must get the Ukrainians to agree first."
What rubbish negotiations that is. "You Ukrainians agree to whatever Putin and I agree together."
It's basically a Ukrainian surrender. No wonder Putinite shills like it.
I don't know if they have to give Trump carte blanche. But certainly he seems to want them to accept some basics before he starts negotiations with the Russians.
What basics?
1. Accede to Russian territorial demands.
2. Acknowledge that what is left becomes a Russian satellite.
3. Agree to let the country be strip-mined by the USA.
That is the “peace” that Trump is seeking.
I don’t think even Putin let alone Trump has said western Ukraine can’t join the EU as long as it doesn’t join NATO.
It is eastern Ukraine Putin wants and in the Crimea, Donbass etc there are many ethnic Russians
How does a "de-militarised" "de-nazified" rump Ukraine avoid becoming a Russian puppet? "Denazification" is in fact what Russians call installing a puppet regime.
These remain Russia's demands.
By joining the EU which Zelensky would demand even if he agrees Russia can keep the Crimea and the land it now controls
Did you read my post?
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Lavrov has made clear Russian core demands are actually control of the five regions they largely now occupy.
No they only fully occupy Crimea. The rest are divided. He wants more than the current front lines.
As I said, full control of those five regions but not necessarily all Ukraine
That includes regions they held but have since been kicked out of, like Kherson West of the river. Without nuclear war. It means no coastline. And ceding Odesa.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
I'd be ok with Guantanamo.
If Trump sees your 2024 Presidential Election positions you may well get it!
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
It's just hatred. It may be wrong but how's it going down any rabbit hole?
Because Sean_F is a deeply intelligent military historian, but his recent posts are just rage and not much else. I would like to see more analysis and insight from some posters, but you need a certain realisation that the world is still turning to be able to analyse anything or have any insight.
The realisation is indeed that the world is turning and as a result we must change our outlook rather than our values. The first change in outlook needs to be that the US is now no longer a friend and should be viewed as a potential and growing enemy in the same way we view Russia
I would settle for viewing them both as foreign countries.
Well, they are both 'foreign'.
But we have a heck of a lot in common with the USA - and far more than we do with Russia. I can see why it is in Putin's interests to have us in Europe disengage with the USA, but there is still chance and opportunities for the US to realise what a series of horrible mistakes it is making.
But there's no way I feel as deeply negative about the USA as I do about Russia. We expect Russia to do deeply bad or evil stuff; we expect better of our friends.
They are both foreign countries, and we should aim to be friendly most of the time, but be independent from both. We are not independent from the US at present. Our defence is wholly intertwined, and our foreign and even latterly our domestic politics has been controlled by them. That was widely nodded sagely away by PB's shrewdie contingent as 'just the way things work nowadays' or words to that effect, indeed to question it too much was ironically itself deemed a form of treachery, to 'the West'. Now those idiots are finding a radical leader who is less to their liking has been elected and they are scrambling around wishing we had more autonomoy. Perhaps they'll learn a lesson from this, though I have my doubts.
You cannot be an independent country any more; perhaps the one that is closest is North Korea; and I'm unsure that we want to go down that route.
'Independence' is pretty much an illusion in the modern world. Everything is just too intertwined: all we can do is try to be as independent as possible in certain spheres. As an example, if it is electronic, we need chips. If it is cutting-edge chips, that means we need to go to South Korea, America, or Taiwan. Unless you want to spend countless billions making our own fabs and all the associated technology, only to find a tiny domestic market (as everyone else has done the same).
And that's just chips. Whether energy, food, domestic goods: we cannot be truly independent of other countries. So we need to choose what we want to spend money on being as independent as possible on. But often it is better to be friends with other countries, and to mutually cooperate with them. This is one reason why Putin was delighted with Brexit.
As for idiots: Look in the mirror. You are all too ready to shill for Putin.
Is it wrong to wish that Trump, Vance, Musk, Hegseth, Gabbard, Waltz, and Rubio finish up in front of a firing squad?
I think it shows you've gone a bit too far down the rabbit hole if I'm being very honest. You might feel it's righteous hatred, but hatred isn’t positive emotion in any context.
Not even in the context of using American spellings on a UK site?
I don't want the perpetrators put before a firing squad.
Apparently he thinks Vlad is being perfectly reasonable in bombing Ukraine and "anyone" would do the same?
You just know Trump himself would love to start firing missiles into Ukraine if he could...
He might be thinking of targets closer to home.
Mexico City and Toronto next in line for the "Shock And Awe" treatment ?
I’m off to Mexico City for work in a few weeks. Via a few days in LA. Not been to Mexico City before so I shall be boning up on things to do.
Visiting the US post Trump election feels a bit like my work trips to Moscow after 2014. Travellers in the 3rd Reich vibes (a good book by the way, I’d recommend it).
Apparently he thinks Vlad is being perfectly reasonable in bombing Ukraine and "anyone" would do the same?
You just know Trump himself would love to start firing missiles into Ukraine if he could...
He might be thinking of targets closer to home.
Mexico City and Toronto next in line for the "Shock And Awe" treatment ?
I’m off to Mexico City for work in a few weeks. Via a few days in LA. Not been to Mexico City before so I shall be boning up on things to do.
Visiting the US post Trump election feels a bit like my work trips to Moscow after 2014. Travellers in the 3rd Reich vibes (a good book by the way, I’d recommend it).
Central London sitrep: it’s 17 degrees, lots of people out and about, and that classic early spring mix of some people in heavy coats and jumpers and others in t-shirts or strappy dresses.
About to head into a 3 hour rehearsal for this evening’s Bach St John’s Passion in St James Sussex Gardens. 7pm. Tickets available on the door.
VERY good q. If just 6% of Birkenhead is unemployed, how can 51% of central Birkenhead be on out-of-work benefits?
Answer is the smoke-and-mirrors of categorisation. Those on sickness benefit don't show up on unemployent figures.
The DWP list of all "out-of-work benefits" gives the full picture
At last count, just 1.7m are claimant unemployed. Reality: a full 6m out-of-work benefits...
It is a significant problem. Our government/political machine has been captured by the "one more cut" mentality. How have we got all these people now in work claiming "benefits?" Lets cut. How have we got few unemployed but lots on the sick? Lets cut.
You can cut the funding, but you can't cut the need. We need to go after the roots of the problem: Too many jobs do not pay the bills Jobs which invest zero in training and skills Not enough jobs Not enough childcare at times / prices to enable work Not enough money invested in preventative care as its been cut
We could take an axe to "benefits: in Birkenhead. The people on them won't be driven back into work as the work isn't there and what work there is isn't viable to live on. So then you get a big uplift in crime which costs loads and crapifies whole communities which costs loads more.
We need to completely reimagine work and social security. And I am increasingly persuaded that UBI needs to be at the heart of it.
The little food bank I'm connected with has families where both parents have full time jobs but their combined income still doesn't cover the bills.
Is that because of food prices or because of housing costs ?
Sometimes it's housing costs; or debts built up; or having the temerity to have more than 2 children.
Good on Missouri. China got off outrageously lightly for concealing COVID, controlling the supply of PPE at the start of the pandemic and generally acting as badly as it could whatever the effects on everybody else.
We should do something similar over here, though no doubt the current China-loving government would do its best to frustrate it.
Comments
TVs - so they should have to sell it to Cash Converters first?
Internet - as you can't access most government services without the internet this is beyond stupid
Cars - again, is the proposal that it should be forcibly sold first?
Alcohol & Cigarettes - because people who need a food bank to eat have a bottle of Lambrini and 40 Lambets?
Holidays - an awful lot of people don't have those
Meals Out - hospitality is having a terrible time as people are skint. Go ask anyone in the trade who isn't a high end restaurant how business is
Tories think poor people are scroungers who need to be further punished. Reform think poor people are target voters who are the victims of the system. Which is why the polling trend has Reform looking likely to hoover up votes in places briefly won by the Tories until they realised they were being blamed for the mess they were in by the people they'd voted for to rescue them from it.
But how can something so wrong, be so right?
Or do you believe that people of Indian heritage, living permanently in the UK, are the property of India?
The problem is that they're still very new, many of the people on board at the start are bonkers and many of the newer people on board are new to politics. So it is happening, under the surface.
And remember this. With social media they are able to connect to their voters in ways that other parties and their activists have no concept of. Unless you're active on the likes of TikTok of course you can't see what they are up to. But their voters can...
Apparently he thinks Vlad is being perfectly reasonable in bombing Ukraine and "anyone" would do the same?
You just know Trump himself would love to start firing missiles into Ukraine if he could...
And that would never happen as there would be demands for payments for X and allowances for Y.
Within a few years the system would be an even more convoluted mess and with higher marginal taxes for those that did work.
Trump and Putin agree a deal that screws Ukraine . Zelenskyy refuses to sign .
Trump says he doesn’t want peace , and then it’s down to Europe .
Trump has a tirade as Europeans refuse to go along with his sell out and pulls out of NATO .
Perhaps the Nobel Committee could award a prize for the Worst Person on the Planet.
Joint winners in 2025: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Except the MAGA crowd would rejoice that "He won a Nobel Prize!"
Russian demands include "Denazification" which means the removal of Zelenskyy and the installation of a pro-Putin regime. Having a pro-Putin puppet inside the EU would also be good for Putin, though they wouldn't be allowed to join.
You talked about Russian demands in your previous post without seeming to be aware of what they are.
Second, unlike the Tories Reform want US style welfare and their official policy is that only those who have contributed via National Insurance when in work should get unemployment benefits
At some point and I expect this will be soon the UK will have to make a choice .
Recent happenings that reveal the 🇬🇧 national “populist” right is ~as out of touch with the British public as the woke/Corbynite/“populist” new left was:
👉English as static, ethno-nationalist category
👉Trump as in sync with the British public
👉Rupert Lowe as popular Agent Of Change
Both the new left populists (A), and the national populist right (B) identified genuine, widespread public antagonisms towards: A) rigged/broken economic model; and
But both then make the mistake of thinking the public share their WHOLE agenda/collection of weird political neuroses. They don’t. Literally nobody cares.
https://nitter.poast.org/DespoticInroad/status/1898320476734140714#m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LasrD6SZkZk (NSFW)
Reality will bite them, just as it did in 2001.
❗️🇵🇱Poland plans to withdraw from conventions banning anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions - Polish Prime Minister Tusk
https://bsky.app/profile/militarynewsua.bsky.social/post/3ljsoryou4k2f
After this phase of the war I expect we may see a new iron curtain of minefields, fortifications and closed borders from Estonia to the Black sea.
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2022/02/europe/russia-ukraine-crisis-poll-intl/index.html
Many Indian people in the U.K. celebrate their heritage. That doesn’t mean that they want Walthamstow annexed by India.
Hence 16/18% in the Easternmost areas saying that Ukraine and Russia should be one country. In that poll.
Absolute filth.
The Uke's are working towards a 15km zone of drones over the Russian side of the front line effectively to prevent any movement, and whack anything that appears.
In the late 70s on a German Exchange I visited the iron curtain. Literally a field fence at the end of a street, then a high security fence, then a dog patrol track, a sand strip (show footprints), then minefields and the whole panoply including watchtowers.
To quote Eisenhower " the time has come to shit or get off the pot".
He's behaving like one.
The Leeanderthal Man vs Rupert 'Mare (longish, but that's them not me). Handbags at dawn. But seemingly not remembering that this is about bullying, and staff who allege such, should be at the centre of this:
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP
Statement.
At Reform UK we have a monumental task on our hands in order to save our country.
There is a huge amount of pressure on Nigel and our team to deliver for the British public. I did not come into politics for personal gain, like my colleagues I stepped forward because I wanted to help save my country.
Joining Reform UK is the best thing I have ever done in politics and this is our last chance to turn things around in our country. But politics is a team game and we must work as a team. I was the first ever Reform UK MP and my first loyalty will always be to my country. I have a great deal of respect for Rupert Lowe and as his Chief Whip I have bent over backwards to be fair with him since he entered Parliament.
But his unwillingness to cooperate in an investigation into his behaviour has meant the Parliamentary party cannot function effectively whilst Rupert is a Reform UK MP.
There is far too much at stake and by not taking decisive action we would risk losing everything we have built up.
I bare no malice towards Rupert and to remove the whip was a deeply painful thing to do, but delivering for our country must come first and no man is bigger than our party.
Lee Anderson, Chief Whip
Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10
Lee. What you have said is simply not true. I have spoken to the KC multiple times over the last week. She has confirmed again and again that no credible evidence against me has been provided to her by you or the party. I must have had ten different conversations with her.
To say I have not cooperated is false. That is an outright lie.
Launching this vindictive assault before an investigation has even started is quite frankly pathetic.
Our members, supporters and country deserve so much better than this.
I thought you were a friend. Evidently, I was wrong.
https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/1898300028617372061
But we have a heck of a lot in common with the USA - and far more than we do with Russia. I can see why it is in Putin's interests to have us in Europe disengage with the USA, but there is still chance and opportunities for the US to realise what a series of horrible mistakes it is making.
But there's no way I feel as deeply negative about the USA as I do about Russia. We expect Russia to do deeply bad or evil stuff; we expect better of our friends.
He seems to be essentially the kingmaker, bringing Musk back to Trump, his longstanding ally, and simultaneously the key person who links Musk, Vance and Trump to the ideologues like Yarvin.
Offer me that now, I'll take it.
Bloody surrender monkeys!
Yes it’s a strategy. But it’s a strategy that will optimise the outcome for Russia
Close cooperation without political straitjackets is the future.
Though as like Putin he has nuclear weapons there isn’t a huge amount we could do about it other than bring Canada and Greenland under the British and French nuclear missile umbrella before to put him off.
Had Ukraine been allowed to keep the nuclear weapons it had in the 1990s Putin wouldn’t have invaded now
'Independence' is pretty much an illusion in the modern world. Everything is just too intertwined: all we can do is try to be as independent as possible in certain spheres. As an example, if it is electronic, we need chips. If it is cutting-edge chips, that means we need to go to South Korea, America, or Taiwan. Unless you want to spend countless billions making our own fabs and all the associated technology, only to find a tiny domestic market (as everyone else has done the same).
And that's just chips. Whether energy, food, domestic goods: we cannot be truly independent of other countries. So we need to choose what we want to spend money on being as independent as possible on. But often it is better to be friends with other countries, and to mutually cooperate with them. This is one reason why Putin was delighted with Brexit.
As for idiots: Look in the mirror. You are all too ready to shill for Putin.
Visiting the US post Trump election feels a bit like my work trips to Moscow after 2014. Travellers in the 3rd Reich vibes (a good book by the way, I’d recommend it).
About to head into a 3 hour rehearsal for this evening’s Bach St John’s Passion in St James Sussex Gardens. 7pm. Tickets available on the door.
Bad Facts, eh?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/missouri-wins-24-billion-judgment-against-china-for-unleashing-covid-19-on-the-world/ar-AA1Aurlx
Good on Missouri. China got off outrageously lightly for concealing COVID, controlling the supply of PPE at the start of the pandemic and generally acting as badly as it could whatever the effects on everybody else.
We should do something similar over here, though no doubt the current China-loving government would do its best to frustrate it.