Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 4h Bondi: "President, you first 100 days has far exceeded that of ANY other presidency in this country. Ever. Ever. Never seen anything like it. Thank you."
Senior No 10 officials called TBI after Tony Blair claimed govt’s net zero plans were “doomed to fail” to urge it to address fallout. But Keir Starmer hasn’t spoken to ex-PM directly.
Labour insiders *very* annoyed with Blair over his comments, saying it undermined PM on key issue, at crucial moment, and was “disloyal” to party.
One Downing Street insider told me: “Tony fucked up.” Another said: “He has completely lost his touch.”
The timing certainly seemed v odd no matter what the merits of the case either way. Why weigh in two days before local elections?
Yes, what was he trying to achieve which required it at that moment?
I was worried the ceramics I bought in Uzbekistan might not make it home - after 6 weeks on the road. They made it back to London. Most importantly this bowl made it back to NW1
Handmade in Gidjuvon, Uzbekistan, a famous old Silk Road Sufi mystic Town which has been making and painting ceramics exactly like this - crafted by the very same family, in the very same kilns - for at least three centuries, as part of a tradition which probably stretches back 3000 years
I was worried the ceramics I bought in Uzbekistan might not make it home - after 6 weeks on the road. They made it back to London. Most importantly this bowl made it back to NW1
Handmade in Gidjuvon, Uzbekistan, a famous old Silk Road Sufi mystic Town which has been making and painting ceramics exactly like this - crafted by the very same family, in the very same kilns - for at least three centuries, as part of a tradition which probably stretches back 3000 years
Awwwww
I got one like that in a shop in Beverley Hills…
I got one like that in Home Bargains in Bognor :-)
I was worried the ceramics I bought in Uzbekistan might not make it home - after 6 weeks on the road. They made it back to London. Most importantly this bowl made it back to NW1
Handmade in Gidjuvon, Uzbekistan, a famous old Silk Road Sufi mystic Town which has been making and painting ceramics exactly like this - crafted by the very same family, in the very same kilns - for at least three centuries, as part of a tradition which probably stretches back 3000 years
Awwwww
Did you have it translated?
Those appear to be the leafy facets of the Dark Knight of the Soul, motif. One of the most powerful of all Jinns. Most often summoned when their beautiful daughters have been leered over by Elders.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 4h Bondi: "President, you first 100 days has far exceeded that of ANY other presidency in this country. Ever. Ever. Never seen anything like it. Thank you."
Trump muses about his guests at the White House being killed: "I want to express my tremendous appreciation to the business leaders here. You are really an amazing group. This is a who's who. I don't want to say -- you know, there's an expression, if something ever went off, the entire industry would be wiped out, but I won't say that. I want to think very positively. And that could never happen here, could it?"
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
Hydrogen is a complete non starter in a domestic setting. Heat pumps work now.
Trump muses about his guests at the White House being killed: "I want to express my tremendous appreciation to the business leaders here. You are really an amazing group. This is a who's who. I don't want to say -- you know, there's an expression, if something ever went off, the entire industry would be wiped out, but I won't say that. I want to think very positively. And that could never happen here, could it?"
Sounds like the sort of threat a mafia don would make
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 4h Bondi: "President, you first 100 days has far exceeded that of ANY other presidency in this country. Ever. Ever. Never seen anything like it. Thank you."
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
Unlike myself? So I guess handling hydrogen at 60 barg and 900degC doesn't count then?
Drove to and from Edinburgh today, as others have similarly noted a pleasing number of mashed insects on the front of car (pleasing only by their presence, not because I enjoy killing tiny organisms). Is this only down to a very warm late spring?
I had a massive honey bee swarm land on my house for a few hours, which was a new one for me. Moved on now to do their important pollination work.
Trump muses about his guests at the White House being killed: "I want to express my tremendous appreciation to the business leaders here. You are really an amazing group. This is a who's who. I don't want to say -- you know, there's an expression, if something ever went off, the entire industry would be wiped out, but I won't say that. I want to think very positively. And that could never happen here, could it?"
Sounds like the sort of threat a mafia don would make
Well, Obama did once joke about using drones on people who messed with his daughters. Not sure how the delivery of either gag was.
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
We had a nasty hydrogen explosion at work last summer. Main thing - no one hurt but luck only. We believe a faulty regulator allowed a leak of hydrogen which pooled in the ceiling void before finding an ignition source - boom. I am not sanguine that hydrogen is a good idea in existing homes with retro fitting, but maybe in new built with appropriate regulation?
My other takeaway comes from extending our 1970s house. Not much insulation in the old wooden clad upper story. The new bit is massively well built and does not get cold. It’s hard to modernise every shitty house but all new ones should be s well built as possible.
We almost had a nasty accident at work when a tank that had held twenty tons of hydrofluoric acid the day before was being flushed out with water and the valve failed and we luckily only got 20 tons of water flooding out
Single valve isolation on the drain line a tank of HF? Whoever let that pass needs a kick up the arse.
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
Unlike myself? So I guess handling hydrogen at 60 barg and 900degC doesn't count then?
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
We had a nasty hydrogen explosion at work last summer. Main thing - no one hurt but luck only. We believe a faulty regulator allowed a leak of hydrogen which pooled in the ceiling void before finding an ignition source - boom. I am not sanguine that hydrogen is a good idea in existing homes with retro fitting, but maybe in new built with appropriate regulation?
My other takeaway comes from extending our 1970s house. Not much insulation in the old wooden clad upper story. The new bit is massively well built and does not get cold. It’s hard to modernise every shitty house but all new ones should be s well built as possible.
We almost had a nasty accident at work when a tank that had held twenty tons of hydrofluoric acid the day before was being flushed out with water and the valve failed and we luckily only got 20 tons of water flooding out
Single valve isolation on the drain line a tank of HF? Whoever let that pass needs a kick up the arse.
That part of the plant was built a long time ago, ironically the reason it was being flushed was for valve replacement which was done frequently
The Lib Dem’s and Greens really should be holding their nose and voting for Labour tomorrow .
This is not the time for self indulgence .
In Runcorn?
Ironically, on purely party political grounds, perhaps it's more the Tories who should be holding their noses and voting Labour in Runcorn.
RefUK are an existential threat to the Tories. It's more of a mixed picture for the Lib Dems (and Greens) - absolutely no doubt those parties don't want Farage getting the keys to Number 10. But for RefUK to split the right wing vote and drag the Tories to the right leaving the centre clear... well, that's a different story.
I'm not saying that as a prediction, by the way. On the ground, a lot of Lib Dem inclined voters will vote tactically to stop Farage, and that's understandable. And I doubt people will be trooping out of the Conservative Club to back Keir in practice. I'm just saying that, looking at the wider political advantage, perhaps that'd be the better play.
Not really, the Tories might get into government with Reform next time if Reform win seats like Runcorn they were second in at the GE and the Tories win seats they were second.
The Tories are certainly not getting into government again at the next GE if Labour hold most of their seats and either win outright again or propped up by the LDs in a hung parliament
Hasn't the rapid turnaround in the Canadian election result not opened your eyes to the possibility that a lot might change between the current polling and the next UK election?
Trump will no longer be in power at either the next UK or Canadian election as a foil against for Labour and the Liberals and in Canada a united right still prevented a Liberal majority and gained seats and over 40% voteshare
Voters continued to vote against Thatcherism long after she’d gone, and a significant part of your party’s problem nowadays is people still voting against Boris. The way Trump is going, his shadow is going to fall over US politics for a long time.
They didn't in 1992 when they voted for Major, Thatcher's chosen heir, over Kinnock, even Blair largely accepted Thatcher's settlement in 1997, hence Maggie herself said 'Tony won't let us down.' Indeed Thatcherism didn't really lose a general election after she went until 2017 and 2019 when May, Boris and Corbyn were all largely big state interventionist leaders.
Boris won the biggest Conservative majority since Thatcher in 2019 and the Conservatives polled higher even when Boris resigned than they got in 2024 and are still polling now
So let me get this straight: Trump genuinely believes the guy had “M S 1 3” tattooed on his knuckles. Not that they had been photoshopped on to illustrate the pictograph meanings. That the letters and numbers were tattooed.
He’s off the scale crazy
He is. I also think he might be more stupid that I previously thought, and I already thought he was dumber than anyone I personally know.
The more this nonsense goes on though I do gain a bit more respect for his last administration, who must have been working around the clock to prevent Trump from wrecking things.
Yes there was a massive effort to 'manage' him last time.
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
You act like all parties don't promise the moon is made of green cheese
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
We had a nasty hydrogen explosion at work last summer. Main thing - no one hurt but luck only. We believe a faulty regulator allowed a leak of hydrogen which pooled in the ceiling void before finding an ignition source - boom. I am not sanguine that hydrogen is a good idea in existing homes with retro fitting, but maybe in new built with appropriate regulation?
My other takeaway comes from extending our 1970s house. Not much insulation in the old wooden clad upper story. The new bit is massively well built and does not get cold. It’s hard to modernise every shitty house but all new ones should be s well built as possible.
We almost had a nasty accident at work when a tank that had held twenty tons of hydrofluoric acid the day before was being flushed out with water and the valve failed and we luckily only got 20 tons of water flooding out
In my 30 plus years doing chemistry I think HF is about the only thing I am scared of. (Obviously diemethyl mercury too, but I’ve never been near a lab using that). HF on the other hand, a post doc I knew back at UEA was sealing HF in pressure tubes and heating to 150 deg C… Not a project I fancied.
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
You act like all parties don't promise the moon is made of green cheese
All may sin, but it does not mean all sins are equal.
That particular example is unusual more in its specificity, since candidates are usually more about the vibes.
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
Is he/she proposing to default on the interest payments? Or simply repay the debts?
It's year 4 of the local cycle round Sefton/Bootle way, so no local elections at all, no mayor, no PCC. There is the nearby Runcorn by-election and a few work colleagues are in the seat (one is a staunch Conservative and now doesn't know what to do) but for me tomorrow is going to be a yawn fest.
I always prefer following elections when I'm able to take part.
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
You act like all parties don't promise the moon is made of green cheese
I was worried the ceramics I bought in Uzbekistan might not make it home - after 6 weeks on the road. They made it back to London. Most importantly this bowl made it back to NW1
Handmade in Gidjuvon, Uzbekistan, a famous old Silk Road Sufi mystic Town which has been making and painting ceramics exactly like this - crafted by the very same family, in the very same kilns - for at least three centuries, as part of a tradition which probably stretches back 3000 years
Awwwww
Did you have it translated?
Those appear to be the leafy facets of the Dark Knight of the Soul, motif. One of the most powerful of all Jinns. Most often summoned when their beautiful daughters have been leered over by Elders.
Apart from that, it’s rather nice.
It looks quite vaginal, to me. The mandorla of the Holy vulva. Sufi eroticism
Also it’s simply gorgeous to hold. Heavy, glossy, weighted with Uzbek history. This famous ceramic family apparently use a special mud. I’m utterly in love with it. I shall fill it - carefully - with Singaporean chicken laksa
More importantly still, this is just the latest artisanal thing I’ve bought on my travels. I used to acquire the odd weird or telling knick knack, often ironic
Now I keenly seek out anything hand made and significant, beautiful, poignant, human, comical. In the last few years I’ve acquired knives, bracelets, paper, plates, necklaces, spoons, hats, scarves, quills, you name it
It just has to be HUMAN. I’ve realised this is me pre-reacting to the onset of the AI era
My browser still seems to be struggling to view the politicsuk ward level forecast for tomorrow. It looks like it is predicting a good result for the Tories in Wiltshire, with around 10 Reform seats albeit some of them look to be pretty randomly placed.
If number of leaflets is an indicator it’s going to be 4:1 Tory:Reform in Warminster…
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
You act like all parties don't promise the moon is made of green cheese
All may sin, but it does not mean all sins are equal.
That particular example is unusual more in its specificity, since candidates are usually more about the vibes.
Are you saying that sin is greater than the tory promise to bring migration down to 10's of 1000s
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
Is he/she proposing to default on the interest payments? Or simply repay the debts?
Who knows. The question was “which council service are you proposing to cut to pay for that” and the response was “we can start with the £85k a day interest”. I imagine they have not thought about it too deeply.
OK having been horribly mean about London for the last six weeks (years?) I have to confess, nothing makes you appreciate the beauty of Georgian/early Victorian townhouse architecture, as six weeks spent in the largely Soviet and post Soviet buildings of Central Asia (the odd bit of Samarkand and Astana excepted)
My God, London can be lovely. Especially in warm late April sun. Especially around Primrose Hill, it is sublime
But why the F can't we build like that, any more?
We can, and Welborne in southern Hampshire looks like showing that you don't even need royal involvement.
But doing it and making space for three cars per household is blooming difficult.
Tell these twats that if they want THREE cars they can fuck off. Then build these beautiful Georgian terraces and squares with enough parking for one car at most. And then: let the market decide
I suspect the people moaning about their stupid cars will suddenly forget their gripes and go for the beautiful house in a beautiful neighborhood
Next you'll be wanting most amenities accessible within a 15 minute walk. Commie.
No, I've always been anti-car. That is to say, I love cars and the freedom they bring, but that freedom can - and will - be delivered in the future by FSD auto e-cars which park themselves overnight in huge underground bunkers, freeing up our town and cities for human beings that WALK and RUN and CYCLE and PLAY and HAVE SEX IN BEAUTIFUL ORCHARDS THAT USED TO BE CAR PARKS
We shall grow thin and slender from all our walking and jogging and laughing and shagging. Our servile automobiles will live in dungeons as they should aways have done
Bring it on. And build like the Georgians again. Garden squares for all
Eastenders was set in a garden square....seemed somewhat dystopian to me at least
There is a real, genuine Albert Square near Stratford. But it only has two sides!
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 4h Bondi: "President, you first 100 days has far exceeded that of ANY other presidency in this country. Ever. Ever. Never seen anything like it. Thank you."
That's not the most batshit crazy thing Pam Bondi said today.
Bondi told Trump that 75 percent of the nation’s population would be dead if not for his leadership.
The attorney general touted that the administration has seized 3,400 kilos of fentanyl since Trump took office, before turning from Trump to face the camera. “Which saved — are you ready for this, media? — 258 million lives. Kids are dying every day because they’re taking this junk, laced with something else. They don’t know what they’re taking. They think they’re buying a Tylenol or an Adderall or an Xanax, and it’s laced with fentanyl dropping dead. No longer, because of you, what you’ve done.”
OK having been horribly mean about London for the last six weeks (years?) I have to confess, nothing makes you appreciate the beauty of Georgian/early Victorian townhouse architecture, as six weeks spent in the largely Soviet and post Soviet buildings of Central Asia (the odd bit of Samarkand and Astana excepted)
My God, London can be lovely. Especially in warm late April sun. Especially around Primrose Hill, it is sublime
But why the F can't we build like that, any more?
We can, and Welborne in southern Hampshire looks like showing that you don't even need royal involvement.
But doing it and making space for three cars per household is blooming difficult.
Tell these twats that if they want THREE cars they can fuck off. Then build these beautiful Georgian terraces and squares with enough parking for one car at most. And then: let the market decide
I suspect the people moaning about their stupid cars will suddenly forget their gripes and go for the beautiful house in a beautiful neighborhood
Next you'll be wanting most amenities accessible within a 15 minute walk. Commie.
No, I've always been anti-car. That is to say, I love cars and the freedom they bring, but that freedom can - and will - be delivered in the future by FSD auto e-cars which park themselves overnight in huge underground bunkers, freeing up our town and cities for human beings that WALK and RUN and CYCLE and PLAY and HAVE SEX IN BEAUTIFUL ORCHARDS THAT USED TO BE CAR PARKS
We shall grow thin and slender from all our walking and jogging and laughing and shagging. Our servile automobiles will live in dungeons as they should aways have done
Bring it on. And build like the Georgians again. Garden squares for all
Eastenders was set in a garden square....seemed somewhat dystopian to me at least
There is a real, genuine Albert Square near Stratford. But it only has two sides!
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
You act like all parties don't promise the moon is made of green cheese
All may sin, but it does not mean all sins are equal.
That particular example is unusual more in its specificity, since candidates are usually more about the vibes.
Are you saying that sin is greater than the tory promise to bring migration down to 10's of 1000s
Or the lib dem promise to abolish tuition fees
Or the labour promise to build 1.5 million homes
All fairly specific
The specificity point was about local elections, where candidatesw know their options are very limited or constrained by central government and so typically make very vague promises they won't need to deliver on (or whose failure will not be their fault, they hope).
As to which of those promises is or will be worse I leave up to the individual voter to decide - the LD won was a political tradeoff, which is acceptable in principle but obviously miscalculated as it turns out. Labour's promise is unrealistic and I expect them to be hit by people angry they've not achieved it and angry that they've even tried, because NIMBYism is very popular.
Your general argument seems to be a nihilistic approach that all parties are the same (apart from the LDs, who are worse), which is fair enough, but I don't really know how you maintain any interest in politics as a result.
My browser still seems to be struggling to view the politicsuk ward level forecast for tomorrow. It looks like it is predicting a good result for the Tories in Wiltshire, with around 10 Reform seats albeit some of them look to be pretty randomly placed.
If number of leaflets is an indicator it’s going to be 4:1 Tory:Reform in Warminster…
If leaflets are anything to go by it will be 10:1 LD and everyone else in Trowbridge, yet Reform are predicted to do well there by politicsuk.
You have to laugh . Reform saying we should give preference to immigrants who are net beneficiaries to the treasury and are less likely to put a strain on services.
So basically that would be people from Europe !
As has been pointed out repeatedly people are against immigration.
But they are not against immigration for high earners who contribute high taxes. They are not against immigration for students who pay high fees and tend to leave after 3 years. They are not against immigration for care workers looking after their parents or grandparents. They are not against immigration for doctors and nurses who can speed up their hip operation.
The above is about 80% of the immigration that people are against........governments can't fix the incoherent and inconsistent policy preferences of voters.
The reality is that people are not against immigration. Immigration is just people moving around and people have always moved around.
People think they are against immigration because they have been riled up and led to believe that immigrants are the source of all problems. They're not.
The argument that "People believe immigration is the source of all the problems" thing is an attempt to engage in a fallacy which says "this thing isn't the whole cause of the problem, therefore we shouldn't bother fixing it". This is nonsense on stilts - even if immigration is only the cause of 5% of our problems, a 5% improvement is much better than a 0% improvement.
You have to laugh . Reform saying we should give preference to immigrants who are net beneficiaries to the treasury and are less likely to put a strain on services.
So basically that would be people from Europe !
As has been pointed out repeatedly people are against immigration.
But they are not against immigration for high earners who contribute high taxes. They are not against immigration for students who pay high fees and tend to leave after 3 years. They are not against immigration for care workers looking after their parents or grandparents. They are not against immigration for doctors and nurses who can speed up their hip operation.
The above is about 80% of the immigration that people are against........governments can't fix the incoherent and inconsistent policy preferences of voters.
The reality is that people are not against immigration. Immigration is just people moving around and people have always moved around.
People think they are against immigration because they have been riled up and led to believe that immigrants are the source of all problems. They're not.
The argument that "People believe immigration is the source of all the problems" thing is an attempt to engage in a fallacy which says "this thing isn't the whole cause of the problem, therefore we shouldn't bother fixing it". This is nonsense on stilts - even if immigration is only the cause of 5% of our problems, a 5% improvement is much better than a 0% improvement.
I wonder whether the only way to resolve this argument is to give the Ultras what they want. Announce a moratorium on immigration for say 2 years, No Immigration At All, and use the time to clear the entire backlog, reduce the pressure on housing and identify those areas where we really do need immigration.
But I think the most useful thing will be to hear the screams of the Ultras as they can't get GP appointments, have to pay double for social care, or they or their (grand)children can't bring their Australian partners into the country.
Then we can have a proper grown up discussion about what sort of immigration is beneficial, and what isn't. Probably we will find we still need a lot of what we currently have. Maybe we will also find out that if employers pay a proper wage rate for delivery drivers and baristas in places like London, they might be able to recruit locally after all.
But we do have to find all this out, because until we do, no level of reduction of immigration will be enough for Reform and the extreme right.
Even I don't think we should have zero immigration - that's unworkable for lots of reasons.
However, the country is fundamentally full. We're building houses at an astonishing pace, the infrastructure is creaking at the seams, and we're not even keeping up with the growth in demand driven by immigration alone. We already have too many people for the country to remain a pleasant place to live, so we should stop adding more.
The fix? We should have an net zero immigration rule - for simplicity we permit in as a maximum, the number of people who left the year before. The best part of half a million people left last year, so it's not like we won't have many spaces available.
We then prioritise for visas relatives/partners of British citizens, probably once they've been British citizens for a minimum qualifying period (say 15 years) to make it really difficult to game the system by immigrating, aquiring citizenship and then importing your extended family.
And then we should auction the remaining visas to the highest bidder, with a substantial price floor (£50k?). If your business really needs someone high value to come from abroad, you'll pay. But it won't be worth it to import Deliveroo Drivers.
Oh and the students, before people raise that boggieman. Take them out of the system, and the numbers, but three conditions. 1) No dependants 2) The cannot work or access social security 3) There is no route for them to remain once their course is finished other than bidding for visas like everyone else.
None of this is hard to do. Yes, there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth from those whose business model is run on cheap imported labour, or who expect a McDonald's delivered in 5 mins at and time of the day or night - but tough. We're currently running an immigration ponzi scheme. It always hurts to drop out of one, but the longer you stay in, the worse the pain when it finally ends.
The number of people in the country depends on multiple factors: immigration, emigration, birth rate, death rate. If the real problem is that we're "creaking at the seams" (and it isn't), then having a policy that tackles immigration but ignores births and deaths doesn't make sense. Why not discourage births? Or, why not encourage emigration?
But the bigger issue is that we're not creaking at the seams. That's just a story that those opposed to immigration have propagated. Plenty of countries have higher population densities and work fine. We are not remotely building houses "at an astonishing pace". That's laughable. We're building way fewer than at many points in the past.
We should be building more houses. We should be investing in infrastructure. Those are real problems. Fix those. Stop blaming immigration.
Of course we're too full. Look at the really nice parts of the country, (eg. Derbyshire Dales) and they have one thing in common. Low population density. I've lived in umpteen different places, the pleasantness of every place has been pretty much inversely proportional to the number of people who get to live there.
My attractive market town of around 20k inhabitants has gained over 1000 new houses in the last 5 years. That's an extraordinary rate of growth, and completely unsustainable. The result has been to collapse the transport infrastructure (ten years ago I never sat in traffic ever - now half the day it's a snarled up hell-hole).
There have been zero new doctors surgeries, they've run down and partially closed the cottage hospital (so for anything serious, including maternity services it's a 45 min drive). No new supermarkets. We are apparently getting a McDonald's though, so it's all good. Oh, and house prices have doubled in ten years, which would be great for a homeowner like me, if it wasn't for the fact that I need a house to live in, so the notional value is meaningless.
The problem is simple - too many people for the space. The fix - stop letting more in.
And yes, birth rates, death rates etc are relevant. But when we're importing a net million people a year, that's the place to look first and most urgently.
I don't think net zero immigration it will even fix much - it's going to take years of building masses of houses to make them affordable again even with the population static, but it will at least reduce the rate at which time are getting rapidly worse, which is where it is headed at the moment.
I live in north London. It's fantastic. I'd hate to live in the Derbyshire Dales. Just because you like living in places of lower population density doesn't prove anything.
Your NHS services are poorer because the Tories underfunded the NHS. The hold-ups in house building are not caused by immigrants existing.
People want different lifestyles shock.
The Tories poured more money than ever into the NHS and it still wasn't enough because we are older, fatter, lazier, sicker than ever and there are more of us. No-one asked the country if they wanted us to have immigration running at the rates it is now. The Tories promised to cut it to the tens of thousands. Its this kind of dishonesty that leads to the rise of reform. Don't get me wrong - Reform are a bunch of racist fuckwits with no answers to the countries problems, but they will still get votes because the common people of the country have had enough of the main parties (and that includes the Lib Dems).
It remains one of the great mysteries in political history why the Conservatives campaigned on bringing immigration down while greatly increasing immigration. Whether you think immigration should be higher or lower, it makes no sense. Either argue it's a good thing and have it higher, or argue it should be lower and make it lower. But why did they make it higher while saying it needed to be lower?
PS: Healthcare funding rose much lower under the Tories than under the previous Labour government.
I know that healthcare funding rose more slowly - it still increased though. In reality there will never be enough funding for the NHS.
I also cannot understand why the Tories did what they did with immigration other than sheer incompetence. Its electoral suicide - its partly what has enabled Reform to thrive. And its just so stupid. Make the case for it and say how you will welcome people to the UK and what will be done for housing and services. Or say it will be less than 100,000 a year and deliver that.
I am stuck in the locals. The Greens have a candidate who did not turn up to hustings, nor have they given any information on what they would do. Literally an empty space in the paper. The Tories are idiots nationally, and need to look at why they lost. Labour are not even standing and that leaves Reform and the Lib Dems, who haven't bothered to leaflet us. I genuinely might spoil my ballot.
A number of people on PB have suggested that they, or spouses, won't vote for a party that hasn't leafletted them. It's good if a party does leaflet you, but that leafletting is done by volunteers. It seems to me overly harsh to rule out a party that hasn't managed to leaflet you.
You as a voter don't have to be passive and await leaflets. I'm sure your local Reform UK and LibDem parties have some sort of web presence. The national parties have websites with their general principles. Even without a leaflet through the door (or hustings appearance), you can work out what candidates believe in.
I won't vote for a party that knocks on my door as its a major irritation and interruption making me answer the door to be lied blatantly too.
I thought you never voted anyway.
Not since 2010 before that I voted in every election. I merely gave up in disgust at the absolute clueless mediocrities all parties tried foisting on us
That’s simply you getting older.
You’re supposed to simply vote for the least clueless, and hope for the best.
It doesn't really matter they are all equally crap, only the lib dems are the worst which is why I will vote anyone to keep one out
That's quite unusual, voting tactically against the Lib Dems.
I also have a "Never kissed a lib dem " T shirt
By the sound of it, there was never going to be that much of a queue.
Umm, is there an "I lost my virginity to a Lib Dem" T shirt? Asking for a friend...
Can I get a T-shirt saying, “I lost my virginity to a Communist who I converted into a lifelong LibDem”?
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
You act like all parties don't promise the moon is made of green cheese
All may sin, but it does not mean all sins are equal.
That particular example is unusual more in its specificity, since candidates are usually more about the vibes.
Are you saying that sin is greater than the tory promise to bring migration down to 10's of 1000s
Or the lib dem promise to abolish tuition fees
Or the labour promise to build 1.5 million homes
All fairly specific
The specificity point was about local elections, where candidatesw know their options are very limited or constrained by central government and so typically make very vague promises they won't need to deliver on (or whose failure will not be their fault, they hope).
As to which of those promises is or will be worse I leave up to the individual voter to decide - the LD won was a political tradeoff, which is acceptable in principle but obviously miscalculated as it turns out. Labour's promise is unrealistic and I expect them to be hit by people angry they've not achieved it and angry that they've even tried, because NIMBYism is very popular.
Your general argument seems to be a nihilistic approach that all parties are the same (apart from the LDs, who are worse), which is fair enough, but I don't really know how you maintain any interest in politics as a result.
I maintain an interest in politics because politics is important, I just don't think our current political setup works for anyone other than party donors so I stay interested in changing it to something that works for all people not just some people,
Now most revolutions have been caused by people who have lost faith in the current politics such as Castro (dont agree with his politics for info) just because he lost faith in the pre revolution politics in cuba didn't mean he lost interest in politics as an example.
I would prefer a gentler transition to a better politics than that but I believe firmly if our current politicians carry on as they have been the last 3 decades we are heading for a significant upheaval as the current politics does not work for the majority. Our political parties are too bought and paid for, likewise the people elected under their banner.
I think the next election is an inflection point possibly where we get chance to give the machine politicians a hearty slap and get them back to thinking of the country with insurgent parties like greens and reform showing them they can no longer take voters for granted
Doesn’t seem to take account of multi seat wards. I cannot see a Labour wipeout in Durham or an independent wipeout,
Although my MPs social media is full of campaigning in what were once very safe wards and they haven’t even bothered where I am.
What stands out is they predict Ref to win at least 1 ward in every county (even Oxon where they are predicting a gain in Blackbird Leys - that would be a stunning result as Oxford City has long been a right wing graveyard)
You have to laugh . Reform saying we should give preference to immigrants who are net beneficiaries to the treasury and are less likely to put a strain on services.
So basically that would be people from Europe !
As has been pointed out repeatedly people are against immigration.
But they are not against immigration for high earners who contribute high taxes. They are not against immigration for students who pay high fees and tend to leave after 3 years. They are not against immigration for care workers looking after their parents or grandparents. They are not against immigration for doctors and nurses who can speed up their hip operation.
The above is about 80% of the immigration that people are against........governments can't fix the incoherent and inconsistent policy preferences of voters.
The reality is that people are not against immigration. Immigration is just people moving around and people have always moved around.
People think they are against immigration because they have been riled up and led to believe that immigrants are the source of all problems. They're not.
The argument that "People believe immigration is the source of all the problems" thing is an attempt to engage in a fallacy which says "this thing isn't the whole cause of the problem, therefore we shouldn't bother fixing it". This is nonsense on stilts - even if immigration is only the cause of 5% of our problems, a 5% improvement is much better than a 0% improvement.
You have to laugh . Reform saying we should give preference to immigrants who are net beneficiaries to the treasury and are less likely to put a strain on services.
So basically that would be people from Europe !
As has been pointed out repeatedly people are against immigration.
But they are not against immigration for high earners who contribute high taxes. They are not against immigration for students who pay high fees and tend to leave after 3 years. They are not against immigration for care workers looking after their parents or grandparents. They are not against immigration for doctors and nurses who can speed up their hip operation.
The above is about 80% of the immigration that people are against........governments can't fix the incoherent and inconsistent policy preferences of voters.
The reality is that people are not against immigration. Immigration is just people moving around and people have always moved around.
People think they are against immigration because they have been riled up and led to believe that immigrants are the source of all problems. They're not.
The argument that "People believe immigration is the source of all the problems" thing is an attempt to engage in a fallacy which says "this thing isn't the whole cause of the problem, therefore we shouldn't bother fixing it". This is nonsense on stilts - even if immigration is only the cause of 5% of our problems, a 5% improvement is much better than a 0% improvement.
I wonder whether the only way to resolve this argument is to give the Ultras what they want. Announce a moratorium on immigration for say 2 years, No Immigration At All, and use the time to clear the entire backlog, reduce the pressure on housing and identify those areas where we really do need immigration.
But I think the most useful thing will be to hear the screams of the Ultras as they can't get GP appointments, have to pay double for social care, or they or their (grand)children can't bring their Australian partners into the country.
Then we can have a proper grown up discussion about what sort of immigration is beneficial, and what isn't. Probably we will find we still need a lot of what we currently have. Maybe we will also find out that if employers pay a proper wage rate for delivery drivers and baristas in places like London, they might be able to recruit locally after all.
But we do have to find all this out, because until we do, no level of reduction of immigration will be enough for Reform and the extreme right.
Even I don't think we should have zero immigration - that's unworkable for lots of reasons.
However, the country is fundamentally full. We're building houses at an astonishing pace, the infrastructure is creaking at the seams, and we're not even keeping up with the growth in demand driven by immigration alone. We already have too many people for the country to remain a pleasant place to live, so we should stop adding more.
The fix? We should have an net zero immigration rule - for simplicity we permit in as a maximum, the number of people who left the year before. The best part of half a million people left last year, so it's not like we won't have many spaces available.
We then prioritise for visas relatives/partners of British citizens, probably once they've been British citizens for a minimum qualifying period (say 15 years) to make it really difficult to game the system by immigrating, aquiring citizenship and then importing your extended family.
And then we should auction the remaining visas to the highest bidder, with a substantial price floor (£50k?). If your business really needs someone high value to come from abroad, you'll pay. But it won't be worth it to import Deliveroo Drivers.
Oh and the students, before people raise that boggieman. Take them out of the system, and the numbers, but three conditions. 1) No dependants 2) The cannot work or access social security 3) There is no route for them to remain once their course is finished other than bidding for visas like everyone else.
None of this is hard to do. Yes, there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth from those whose business model is run on cheap imported labour, or who expect a McDonald's delivered in 5 mins at and time of the day or night - but tough. We're currently running an immigration ponzi scheme. It always hurts to drop out of one, but the longer you stay in, the worse the pain when it finally ends.
The number of people in the country depends on multiple factors: immigration, emigration, birth rate, death rate. If the real problem is that we're "creaking at the seams" (and it isn't), then having a policy that tackles immigration but ignores births and deaths doesn't make sense. Why not discourage births? Or, why not encourage emigration?
But the bigger issue is that we're not creaking at the seams. That's just a story that those opposed to immigration have propagated. Plenty of countries have higher population densities and work fine. We are not remotely building houses "at an astonishing pace". That's laughable. We're building way fewer than at many points in the past.
We should be building more houses. We should be investing in infrastructure. Those are real problems. Fix those. Stop blaming immigration.
Of course we're too full. Look at the really nice parts of the country, (eg. Derbyshire Dales) and they have one thing in common. Low population density. I've lived in umpteen different places, the pleasantness of every place has been pretty much inversely proportional to the number of people who get to live there.
My attractive market town of around 20k inhabitants has gained over 1000 new houses in the last 5 years. That's an extraordinary rate of growth, and completely unsustainable. The result has been to collapse the transport infrastructure (ten years ago I never sat in traffic ever - now half the day it's a snarled up hell-hole).
There have been zero new doctors surgeries, they've run down and partially closed the cottage hospital (so for anything serious, including maternity services it's a 45 min drive). No new supermarkets. We are apparently getting a McDonald's though, so it's all good. Oh, and house prices have doubled in ten years, which would be great for a homeowner like me, if it wasn't for the fact that I need a house to live in, so the notional value is meaningless.
The problem is simple - too many people for the space. The fix - stop letting more in.
And yes, birth rates, death rates etc are relevant. But when we're importing a net million people a year, that's the place to look first and most urgently.
I don't think net zero immigration it will even fix much - it's going to take years of building masses of houses to make them affordable again even with the population static, but it will at least reduce the rate at which time are getting rapidly worse, which is where it is headed at the moment.
I live in north London. It's fantastic. I'd hate to live in the Derbyshire Dales. Just because you like living in places of lower population density doesn't prove anything.
Your NHS services are poorer because the Tories underfunded the NHS. The hold-ups in house building are not caused by immigrants existing.
People want different lifestyles shock.
The Tories poured more money than ever into the NHS and it still wasn't enough because we are older, fatter, lazier, sicker than ever and there are more of us. No-one asked the country if they wanted us to have immigration running at the rates it is now. The Tories promised to cut it to the tens of thousands. Its this kind of dishonesty that leads to the rise of reform. Don't get me wrong - Reform are a bunch of racist fuckwits with no answers to the countries problems, but they will still get votes because the common people of the country have had enough of the main parties (and that includes the Lib Dems).
It remains one of the great mysteries in political history why the Conservatives campaigned on bringing immigration down while greatly increasing immigration. Whether you think immigration should be higher or lower, it makes no sense. Either argue it's a good thing and have it higher, or argue it should be lower and make it lower. But why did they make it higher while saying it needed to be lower?
PS: Healthcare funding rose much lower under the Tories than under the previous Labour government.
I know that healthcare funding rose more slowly - it still increased though. In reality there will never be enough funding for the NHS.
I also cannot understand why the Tories did what they did with immigration other than sheer incompetence. Its electoral suicide - its partly what has enabled Reform to thrive. And its just so stupid. Make the case for it and say how you will welcome people to the UK and what will be done for housing and services. Or say it will be less than 100,000 a year and deliver that.
I am stuck in the locals. The Greens have a candidate who did not turn up to hustings, nor have they given any information on what they would do. Literally an empty space in the paper. The Tories are idiots nationally, and need to look at why they lost. Labour are not even standing and that leaves Reform and the Lib Dems, who haven't bothered to leaflet us. I genuinely might spoil my ballot.
A number of people on PB have suggested that they, or spouses, won't vote for a party that hasn't leafletted them. It's good if a party does leaflet you, but that leafletting is done by volunteers. It seems to me overly harsh to rule out a party that hasn't managed to leaflet you.
You as a voter don't have to be passive and await leaflets. I'm sure your local Reform UK and LibDem parties have some sort of web presence. The national parties have websites with their general principles. Even without a leaflet through the door (or hustings appearance), you can work out what candidates believe in.
I won't vote for a party that knocks on my door as its a major irritation and interruption making me answer the door to be lied blatantly too.
I thought you never voted anyway.
Not since 2010 before that I voted in every election. I merely gave up in disgust at the absolute clueless mediocrities all parties tried foisting on us
That’s simply you getting older.
You’re supposed to simply vote for the least clueless, and hope for the best.
It doesn't really matter they are all equally crap, only the lib dems are the worst which is why I will vote anyone to keep one out
That's quite unusual, voting tactically against the Lib Dems.
I also have a "Never kissed a lib dem " T shirt
By the sound of it, there was never going to be that much of a queue.
Umm, is there an "I lost my virginity to a Lib Dem" T shirt? Asking for a friend...
Can I get a T-shirt saying, “I lost my virginity to a Communist who I converted into a lifelong LibDem”?
Communist to lib dem is hardly a conversion lib dems will believe anything if it gets an extra vote
It's year 4 of the local cycle round Sefton/Bootle way, so no local elections at all, no mayor, no PCC. There is the nearby Runcorn by-election and a few work colleagues are in the seat (one is a staunch Conservative and now doesn't know what to do) but for me tomorrow is going to be a yawn fest.
I always prefer following elections when I'm able to take part.
I would like them to get rid of the election by thirds and move everywhere to all out and then have all English local elections at once as they do in Scotland and Wales. Would probably help drive up turnout (although the activists might not like it)
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
It's year 4 of the local cycle round Sefton/Bootle way, so no local elections at all, no mayor, no PCC. There is the nearby Runcorn by-election and a few work colleagues are in the seat (one is a staunch Conservative and now doesn't know what to do) but for me tomorrow is going to be a yawn fest.
I always prefer following elections when I'm able to take part.
I would like them to get rid of the election by thirds and move everywhere to all out and then have all English local elections at once as they do in Scotland and Wales. Would probably help drive up turnout (although the activists might not like it)
I've even heard of some elections being by half, though I don't know of anywhere which actually does it. Madness, I tell you, madness!
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Decarbonising leccy generation is the easy bit. And can be achieved without CCS on CCGT plants, but DESNZ has other ideas.
The hard bit includes domestic heating. Here, we have two options. Option 1, turn off the gas supply and force everyone to have a shitty air source heat pump, necessitating ripping out your entire heating system. Option 2, switch the gas network to hydrogen, which just requires a new boiler, but triggers a load of fuckwits to shout "Hindenburg" until they are blue in the face. Both options require a load more low carbon power generation, either to supply the shitty heat pumps or to make electrolytic hydrogen. Big investment required, which will find its way onto gas and leccy bills, and capital cost to every household that is impacted.
Heat pumps aren’t shitty.
The issues with hydrogen in a domestic setting include needing to replace all the existing pipework, leaks and detection and observing the safety rules for hydrogen. Which are extensive and carefully created over decades of practise in handling hydrogen.
Unlike yourself, I’ve actually handled hydrogen in serious quantities. It is completely safe, if you keep to the safety rules. If you don’t, it bites.
We had a nasty hydrogen explosion at work last summer. Main thing - no one hurt but luck only. We believe a faulty regulator allowed a leak of hydrogen which pooled in the ceiling void before finding an ignition source - boom. I am not sanguine that hydrogen is a good idea in existing homes with retro fitting, but maybe in new built with appropriate regulation?
My other takeaway comes from extending our 1970s house. Not much insulation in the old wooden clad upper story. The new bit is massively well built and does not get cold. It’s hard to modernise every shitty house but all new ones should be s well built as possible.
Barrats et al beg to differ on "all new ones should be s well built as possible"
Then government should mandate and enforce. Of course some companies will try to ge5 away with stuff. Don’t let them. We regulate cars, planes trains safety well enough. Why not housing standards?
Last time I got chatting to my boiler inspection guy - he was telling me about some new-build 'eco houses' (his words) he'd been working at. The developers had to provide photographic evidence they'd fitted Ultra++ insulation. So dutifully they fitted it to a bit of wall, took the photo, ... then took it off again. Pinned it up to the next bit of wall and took the photo.
Repeat for every bit of wall, in every house in the development.
Spoke to my Dad this evening who lives in S Gloucestershire. He has heard deafening silence from the parties on the mayoral election
It is interesting how some mayoralties have managed to establish themselves and get some national presence, and others have not. I'm not sure WECA has really settled as such an entity.
It's year 4 of the local cycle round Sefton/Bootle way, so no local elections at all, no mayor, no PCC. There is the nearby Runcorn by-election and a few work colleagues are in the seat (one is a staunch Conservative and now doesn't know what to do) but for me tomorrow is going to be a yawn fest.
I always prefer following elections when I'm able to take part.
I would like them to get rid of the election by thirds and move everywhere to all out and then have all English local elections at once as they do in Scotland and Wales. Would probably help drive up turnout (although the activists might not like it)
I've even heard of some elections being by half, though I don't know of anywhere which actually does it. Madness, I tell you, madness!
Adur, Cheltenham, Fareham, Gosport, Hastings, Nuneaton and Bedworth, and Oxford. Elections every even year.
Passed through Leicestershire in the last week and saw a lot of orange diamonds. Assume the bar charts have already been catered for and a landslide awaits.
Aaron Rupar @atrupar · 4h Bondi: "President, you first 100 days has far exceeded that of ANY other presidency in this country. Ever. Ever. Never seen anything like it. Thank you."
Passed through Leicestershire in the last week and saw a lot of orange diamonds. Assume the bar charts have already been catered for and a landslide awaits.
Not seen any round my parts, though all Leics has elections.
What's the over/under on how long before Trump hates the 'perfect' deal they just signed?
From what little I've seen the deal is reasonably good for Ukraine. My working assumption is that if Trump ever understands what is in the deal he's going to fire all his underlings who were responsible for its creation and then disown it.
Or else Trump isn't about to abandon Ukraine completely and snuggle up to Putin.
It's a bit odd how this polling company always gives the best results for RefUK. On the other hand their figures are only slightly different from the latest YouGov poll.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
One of the prospective Reform councillors in Northumberland wants the council to compulsory purchase shops and flats, refurbish them, and then rent them out on the cheap. This endeavour will be funded, apparently, by stopping the payment of £85k per day of interest. Really unsure how that is going to happen. These people are dense.
Is he/she proposing to default on the interest payments? Or simply repay the debts?
Who knows. The question was “which council service are you proposing to cut to pay for that” and the response was “we can start with the £85k a day interest”. I imagine they have not thought about it too deeply.
They abolished surcharges for local councillors in 2000 so now they can be as fuckwitted, irresponsible and unaccountable as MPs (I don't what labour were thinking).
It's a bit odd how this polling company always gives the best results for RefUK. On the other hand their figures are only slightly different from the latest YouGov poll.
They tend to be good for Green too, which suggests something that’s enhancing non-traditional party VI. But we’ll see tomorrow. I think the Greens will do well too. A free hit for lefties fed up with Labour’s Reform-lite agenda.
LLG 45, RefCon 48, so really not out of line with others on the left:right split, just on party votes.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
It's a bit odd how this polling company always gives the best results for RefUK. On the other hand their figures are only slightly different from the latest YouGov poll.
They tend to be good for Green too, which suggests something that’s enhancing non-traditional party VI. But we’ll see tomorrow. I think the Greens will do well too. A free hit for lefties fed up with Labour’s Reform-lite agenda.
LLG 45, RefCon 48, so really not out of line with others on the left:right split, just on party votes.
What didn’t happen at the last general election was Ref and Con lending each other votes efficiently to give the other seats, in the same way Labour, LibDem, Green, voters voted to stop Ref and Con gaining seats. This is the only explanation for the actual result. Block 1 Lab 33.7% - 412 seats; LibDem 12.2% - 72 seats; Green 6.7% - 4 seats. Block 2 Conservatives 23.7% - 121 seats. Block 3 Reform 14.3% - 5 seats.
I expect a similar thing from today’s votes. Reform to struggle in the Parliament election and several Mayor elections due to getting ganged up on.
There’s already media reporting Lib Dem and Labour canvassing in posh Tory areas for one nation Farage hating Tories who could be the ones who make the difference in thwarting Reform.
Aside from that, Labour and Conservative will struggle to get voters to the polls.
And that’s my psephological summing up of what happened, before a votes even cast 😇
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
The Money has to be spent in Ukraine doesn't it?
Plus nothing is going to be dug up while Trump is in office
Thirdly, the Ukes can tear up the deal as soon as it is safe to do so. A contract signed under duress is worth nothing.
So I don't think Trump gets anything from this deal.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
We have discussed it often enough on PB - I have gone from knowing zilch about these things to knowing mining is just one cost and time consuming activity, some rare earths need processing that is energy consuming and expensive, all this factored in before you start making any profit at all. And much Ukrainian rare earths are guesswork from ancient soviet surveys - so the key difference in the industry of not being sure what’s there and actually knowing what’s there. And as you said yourself, Robert, first thing about rare earths they are not all that rare, so why the USA choosing rare earths below argued over land in what’s currently a hot war without any end?
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
Good evening from the rooftop bar at the LondonHouse Chicago, where a small beer just set me back $11.
Shit weather here today, which is a shame. But some excellent skyscraper architecture to look at. From neo-gothic to art deco to modernist to postmodern to whatever we call contemporary architecture including, though it pains me to say it, the Trump tower which is actually a pretty decent building if you ignore the huge “TRUMP” emblazoned on it.
I’m going to miss the voting because my postal vote didn’t turn up. So Brockley ward wont be turning Lib Dem after all.
Just getting used to the warm weather, so I see the forecast for Sunday is 14 in the day and 2 at night, lol.
Almost certainly a string of frosts next week at my vineyard, as it’s in a sheltered valley. Bloody annoying because I’ve gone nearly a month without frost. For the second year in a row it’s waited until the leaves are out to strike.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
We have discussed it often enough on PB - I have gone from knowing zilch about these things to knowing mining is just one cost and time consuming activity, some rare earths need processing that is energy consuming and expensive, all this factored in before you start making any profit at all. And much Ukrainian rare earths are guesswork from ancient soviet surveys - so the key difference in the industry of not being sure what’s there and actually knowing what’s there. And as you said yourself, Robert, first thing about rare earths they are not all that rare, so why the USA choosing rare earths below argued over land in what’s currently a hot war without any end?
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
The building directly opposite me epitomises his art of the deal. Vastly expensive to build, has never got close to making a profit, impaired in value multiple times, and its main value now is a source of tax losses incorrectly/illegally offset against taxable income.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
We have discussed it often enough on PB - I have gone from knowing zilch about these things to knowing mining is just one cost and time consuming activity, some rare earths need processing that is energy consuming and expensive, all this factored in before you start making any profit at all. And much Ukrainian rare earths are guesswork from ancient soviet surveys - so the key difference in the industry of not being sure what’s there and actually knowing what’s there. And as you said yourself, Robert, first thing about rare earths they are not all that rare, so why the USA choosing rare earths below argued over land in what’s currently a hot war without any end?
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
I think reality doesn't matter to Trump: all he cares about is how is perceived, and that he is seen to have come out on top.
Ukraine signed *his* minerals deal. And therefore, Trump (and to a lesser extent the US) has won.
What happens next is irrelevant; he gets to declare victory.
Good evening from the rooftop bar at the LondonHouse Chicago, where a small beer just set me back $11.
Shit weather here today, which is a shame. But some excellent skyscraper architecture to look at. From neo-gothic to art deco to modernist to postmodern to whatever we call contemporary architecture including, though it pains me to say it, the Trump tower which is actually a pretty decent building if you ignore the huge “TRUMP” emblazoned on it.
I’m going to miss the voting because my postal vote didn’t turn up. So Brockley ward wont be turning Lib Dem after all.
Good evening from the rooftop bar at the LondonHouse Chicago, where a small beer just set me back $11.
Shit weather here today, which is a shame. But some excellent skyscraper architecture to look at. From neo-gothic to art deco to modernist to postmodern to whatever we call contemporary architecture including, though it pains me to say it, the Trump tower which is actually a pretty decent building if you ignore the huge “TRUMP” emblazoned on it.
I’m going to miss the voting because my postal vote didn’t turn up. So Brockley ward wont be turning Lib Dem after all.
The scandal is the plastic not the $11.
Elf n safety innit. Otherwise might throw a glass container over the edge on to pedestrians below.
But yes, the plastic reinforces the daylight robbery.
Having said that, a glass of mediocre Cali Chardonnay at the - nice, but certainly far from posh - burger restaurant where I’m having dinner was $12. And there’s no view here.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
We have discussed it often enough on PB - I have gone from knowing zilch about these things to knowing mining is just one cost and time consuming activity, some rare earths need processing that is energy consuming and expensive, all this factored in before you start making any profit at all. And much Ukrainian rare earths are guesswork from ancient soviet surveys - so the key difference in the industry of not being sure what’s there and actually knowing what’s there. And as you said yourself, Robert, first thing about rare earths they are not all that rare, so why the USA choosing rare earths below argued over land in what’s currently a hot war without any end?
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
I think reality doesn't matter to Trump: all he cares about is how is perceived, and that he is seen to have come out on top.
Ukraine signed *his* minerals deal. And therefore, Trump (and to a lesser extent the US) has won.
What happens next is irrelevant; he gets to declare victory.
A deal that puts American mining companies on the ground will be as good as a minefield at stopping Russian tanks.
I don't think we'll achieve it either, but I still think we should.
There is currently Zero evidence that the world will achieve net zero by 2050, and at the moment CO2 emissions are both continuing and at a rate faster than previously (USA, Russia, China, India etc). The world is saying it is trying to decrease something while increasing it.
So the real question, being political and pragmatic, is: When everyone stops fooling themselves and realises this, will there be any political will in the UK (or any other country) to 'go it alone' when it makes no substantial difference?
The three groups with a will for going it alone are:
a) People who are making obscene amounts of money from 'the transition' b) People who are taking obscene amounts of money from the people making onscene amounts of money from 'the transition' c) Real hardcore nutters who would like us to re-enter the stone age
The last time we really did a 'go it alone' was under Elizabeth I maybe? That worked out rather well.
(And if you argue it was under Cromwell, then that also finished up as not so bad)
We are not talking about an independent foreign policy (if only), we are talking about unilateral economic self-mutilation when nobody else can be arsed. No other countries are opposing our Net Zero plans, they are simply looking on with pitying bemusement.
That’s a complete myth. Nearly every country in the world has a net zero goal, generally in a similar time frame.
There is a difference between
having a net zero policy you are actually trying to implement
and
having a net zero policy you agreed to in order to get a photo op signing up for a climate accord that you have no intention of seriously trying for.
I would suggest most countries fall into the latter category
You are a cynic and wouldn't believe it, whatever those countries actually did.
The first COP meeting was in 1995, 30 years ago, and CO2 levels are rising faster than ever, (and Trump is the POTUS). It is not unrealistic to have a degree of scepticism about the 2050 target, regardless of personal views about what would be good for the planet.
Trump, by crashing the US economy and radically reducing international trade, is doing a great job at reducing US carbon emissions. I mean, I prefer the UK approach of reducing carbon emissions and having a growing economy, but Trump has his own way of doing things...
Have we done this?
Trump on China: "They made a trillion dollars with Biden selling us stuff. Much of it we don't need. Somebody said, 'oh, the shelves are gonna be open.' Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, and maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more."
Maybe he's right, but it's a brave statement, Mr President.
This is not at base too different from rcs1000 banging on about household savings ratios. Both share not spending money on imports; Trump's version involves not saving but buying home-produced goods instead.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
We have discussed it often enough on PB - I have gone from knowing zilch about these things to knowing mining is just one cost and time consuming activity, some rare earths need processing that is energy consuming and expensive, all this factored in before you start making any profit at all. And much Ukrainian rare earths are guesswork from ancient soviet surveys - so the key difference in the industry of not being sure what’s there and actually knowing what’s there. And as you said yourself, Robert, first thing about rare earths they are not all that rare, so why the USA choosing rare earths below argued over land in what’s currently a hot war without any end?
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
I think reality doesn't matter to Trump: all he cares about is how is perceived, and that he is seen to have come out on top.
Ukraine signed *his* minerals deal. And therefore, Trump (and to a lesser extent the US) has won.
What happens next is irrelevant; he gets to declare victory.
A deal that puts American mining companies on the ground will be as good as a minefield at stopping Russian tanks.
No, it will not.
The presence of private foreign companies has zero deterrent impact.
The only thing that deters an invasion is the presence of foreign soldiers, because shooting at those soldiers is an act of war.
Shooting at the property of foreigners isn't an act of war.
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
Being able to bully a weaker nation in a desperate situation should result in a good 'deal' for the United States as a bare minimum I would say.
I don’t see it like that.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
I tend to agree with you: it's unlikely the US will never make a penny out of this, because the chances of there being commercially exploitable rare earths is so small.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
We have discussed it often enough on PB - I have gone from knowing zilch about these things to knowing mining is just one cost and time consuming activity, some rare earths need processing that is energy consuming and expensive, all this factored in before you start making any profit at all. And much Ukrainian rare earths are guesswork from ancient soviet surveys - so the key difference in the industry of not being sure what’s there and actually knowing what’s there. And as you said yourself, Robert, first thing about rare earths they are not all that rare, so why the USA choosing rare earths below argued over land in what’s currently a hot war without any end?
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
I think reality doesn't matter to Trump: all he cares about is how is perceived, and that he is seen to have come out on top.
Ukraine signed *his* minerals deal. And therefore, Trump (and to a lesser extent the US) has won.
What happens next is irrelevant; he gets to declare victory.
A deal that puts American mining companies on the ground will be as good as a minefield at stopping Russian tanks.
No, it will not.
The presence of private foreign companies has zero deterrent impact.
The only thing that deters an invasion is the presence of foreign soldiers, because shooting at those soldiers is an act of war.
Shooting at the property of foreigners isn't an act of war.
If there is a spread bet on the number of American miners killed by Russia, I'd sell. You?
ETA you do hear some isolationist Americans (who might or might not have been seeded by Russian trolls) complaining that Churchill tricked Roosevelt into the second world war.
Tesla’s board in March contacted multiple executive placement firms to begin a search process for a new CEO to replace Elon Musk at the helm of the embattled electric car company, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing multiple anonymous sources.
Please provide the usual Matt Goodwin health warning.
Although by this time tomorrow Refuk will probably be in clover. The fightback starts here!
I just don't know who these 21% are who want more of what we've got. There can't be that many junior doctors, train drivers and employees of GB Energy.
Please provide the usual Matt Goodwin health warning.
Although by this time tomorrow Refuk will probably be in clover. The fightback starts here!
I just don't know who these 21% are who want more of what we've got. There can't be that many junior doctors, train drivers and employees of GB Energy.
Don't forget the Scunthorpe steel workers, Lucky. Sample may have have been taken is South Yorkshire.
Please provide the usual Matt Goodwin health warning.
Although by this time tomorrow Refuk will probably be in clover. The fightback starts here!
I just don't know who these 21% are who want more of what we've got. There can't be that many junior doctors, train drivers and employees of GB Energy.
Don't forget the Scunthorpe steel workers, Lucky. Sample may have have been taken is South Yorkshire.
Hmmm. How does this by the Ukraine Deputy First Minister:
In a post on social media he said the two countries would establish a reconstruction investment fund with each side having 50% voting rights and made clear that Kyiv would not be asked to pay back any “debt” for US aid during the war. (Your link)
square with this from Mr Chump:
The minerals deal, which has been the subject of tense negotiations for months and nearly fell through hours before it was signed, will establish a US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund that the Trump administration has said will begin to repay an estimated $175bn in aid provided to Ukraine since the beginning of the war. (Link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/30/us-ukraine-minerals-deal-russia)
Too many weasel words and overlap; we need the full text.
It's interesting, though peripheral, that the lawyers mentioned as advising Ukraine are Hogan Lovells, who are one of the firms unconstitutionally targeted by Trump's regime via an Executive Order in his aim to extort 100s of $m of free legal representation.
With the information I have, I'd say that this is a generalist set of principles, which Ukraine intend to use to hold the US Govt onside whilst preventing them pivoting to Russia in practice (rather than in their heads) - whilst there is more time for Russia's economy and arms supply to run down.
And that Trump has backed down from his bluster as his balloon popped, as he always does when reality dawns. Trump is looking for corrupt opportunities to use his position to enrich himself, his friends, and his puppet masters.
I've just read that Gatwick airport management are putting up the drop off charge to 7quid from 2 May. There is no possible justification apart from some bullshit about the eco footprint bollocks so often spoken about. If Gatwick was worried about it's eco footprintbolocks they'd reduce the no of flights not try for a second runway. The whole business is shambolic and designed to fleece the traveller.
You get 2 hrs pick up and drop off at the long stay foc and the airport buses are every few minutes and only take a few minutes so it is a bit of an unnecessary luxury to be delivered or picked up directly from the terminal to be honest.
I would have put the charge up even further. People complaining about this probably have a bad case of CarBrain, they can't comprehend doing anything but using a car to drive right to the door of the place they need to be.
I normally get the train to Gatwick, unless I have a particularly early flight - and I tend not to book those. Partly because I can't get there, partly because getting up in the middle of the night starts a trip on a bum note
The couple of times I’ve had an early flight from Gatwick it’s been travel down the night before and the premier inn by the airport isn’t that expensive in the scheme of things
I shall be getting a neighbour to drop me at the petrol station and walk the 100 yds or so to the escalator. SCREW Gatwick who are putting up the charge to make them look green. It's Ed Milibandism and they can get stuffed.
I’ve just seen the figures showing a huge problem with UK illegal immigration. Yes, the UK is the 4th highest country of origin for illegal immigrants overstaying their visa in Australia: https://www.migrationsolutions.com.au/australias-over-stayers/
Comments
Those appear to be the leafy facets of the Dark Knight of the Soul, motif. One of the most powerful of all Jinns. Most often summoned when their beautiful daughters have been leered over by Elders.
Apart from that, it’s rather nice.
Those RoW tariffs will be back and China is facing down the US.
Trump muses about his guests at the White House being killed: "I want to express my tremendous appreciation to the business leaders here. You are really an amazing group. This is a who's who. I don't want to say -- you know, there's an expression, if something ever went off, the entire industry would be wiped out, but I won't say that. I want to think very positively. And that could never happen here, could it?"
Heat pumps work now.
Boris won the biggest Conservative majority since Thatcher in 2019 and the Conservatives polled higher even when Boris resigned than they got in 2024 and are still polling now
That particular example is unusual more in its specificity, since candidates are usually more about the vibes.
It's year 4 of the local cycle round Sefton/Bootle way, so no local elections at all, no mayor, no PCC. There is the nearby Runcorn by-election and a few work colleagues are in the seat (one is a staunch Conservative and now doesn't know what to do) but for me tomorrow is going to be a yawn fest.
I always prefer following elections when I'm able to take part.
Also it’s simply gorgeous to hold. Heavy, glossy, weighted with Uzbek history. This famous ceramic family apparently use a special mud. I’m utterly in love with it. I shall fill it - carefully - with Singaporean chicken laksa
More importantly still, this is just the latest artisanal thing I’ve bought on my travels. I used to acquire the odd weird or telling knick knack, often ironic
Now I keenly seek out anything hand made and significant, beautiful, poignant, human, comical. In the last few years I’ve acquired knives, bracelets, paper, plates, necklaces, spoons, hats, scarves, quills, you name it
It just has to be HUMAN. I’ve realised this is me pre-reacting to the onset of the AI era
Or the lib dem promise to abolish tuition fees
Or the labour promise to build 1.5 million homes
All fairly specific
The attorney general touted that the administration has seized 3,400 kilos of fentanyl since Trump took office, before turning from Trump to face the camera. “Which saved — are you ready for this, media? — 258 million lives. Kids are dying every day because they’re taking this junk, laced with something else. They don’t know what they’re taking. They think they’re buying a Tylenol or an Adderall or an Xanax, and it’s laced with fentanyl dropping dead. No longer, because of you, what you’ve done.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-30/us-and-ukraine-sign-agreement-on-access-to-natural-resources
As to which of those promises is or will be worse I leave up to the individual voter to decide - the LD won was a political tradeoff, which is acceptable in principle but obviously miscalculated as it turns out. Labour's promise is unrealistic and I expect them to be hit by people angry they've not achieved it and angry that they've even tried, because NIMBYism is very popular.
Your general argument seems to be a nihilistic approach that all parties are the same (apart from the LDs, who are worse), which is fair enough, but I don't really know how you maintain any interest in politics as a result.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5275236-vance-calls-most-presidents-in-oval-office-portraits-placeholders/
Now most revolutions have been caused by people who have lost faith in the current politics such as Castro (dont agree with his politics for info) just because he lost faith in the pre revolution politics in cuba didn't mean he lost interest in politics as an example.
I would prefer a gentler transition to a better politics than that but I believe firmly if our current politicians carry on as they have been the last 3 decades we are heading for a significant upheaval as the current politics does not work for the majority. Our political parties are too bought and paid for, likewise the people elected under their banner.
I think the next election is an inflection point possibly where we get chance to give the machine politicians a hearty slap and get them back to thinking of the country with insurgent parties like greens and reform showing them they can no longer take voters for granted
On behalf of the Government of Ukraine, I signed the Agreement on the Establishment of a United States–Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund.
Together with the United States, we are creating the Fund that will attract global investment into our country.
https://x.com/Svyrydenko_Y/status/1917695985507053772
State Dept spox Tammy Bruce says she doesn't have the details of the new minerals deal with Ukraine, but in the next breath claims "it is of course -- and it's not a surprise, because it's President Donald Trump -- it is the perfect deal."
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lo2rudep722i
RefUK 29%
Lab 21%
Con 19%
LD 13%
Grn 11%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2025
Although by this time tomorrow Refuk will probably be in clover. The fightback starts here!
Or else Trump isn't about to abandon Ukraine completely and snuggle up to Putin.
I am cautiously optimistic.
I think though tomorrow's results will show FON is exaggerating how well Reform are doing
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=19&LAB=21&LIB=13&Reform=29&Green=11&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024base
Nigel Farage says he doesn't want the NHS funded "through general taxation"
"I want it free at the point of delivery, but it's how we get there"
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1917715746718671313
Intriguing position from Mr Farage.
I think it’s Ukraine who wanted it signed, and the Trump Administration truly unwise to sign it.
The same deal was offered to Biden’s administration, and they said no.
There’s so many experts on web who argued US shouldn’t sign this, as it was bad commercially, scientifically, and bad politically to be tied into this.
Believing Trump has made a huge mistake, and this is a win for Ukraine, I’m just dumbfounded.
LLG 45, RefCon 48, so really not out of line with others on the left:right split, just on party votes.
That said, the question is very much does Ukraine get anything?
At the very least, I hope this means the US continued to support Ukraine.
Block 1 Lab 33.7% - 412 seats; LibDem 12.2% - 72 seats; Green 6.7% - 4 seats.
Block 2 Conservatives 23.7% - 121 seats.
Block 3 Reform 14.3% - 5 seats.
I expect a similar thing from today’s votes. Reform to struggle in the Parliament election and several Mayor elections due to getting ganged up on.
There’s already media reporting Lib Dem and Labour canvassing in posh Tory areas for one nation Farage hating Tories who could be the ones who make the difference in thwarting Reform.
Aside from that, Labour and Conservative will struggle to get voters to the polls.
And that’s my psephological summing up of what happened, before a votes even cast 😇
Plus nothing is going to be dug up while Trump is in office
Thirdly, the Ukes can tear up the deal as soon as it is safe to do so. A contract signed under duress is worth nothing.
So I don't think Trump gets anything from this deal.
Biden asked around if any companies fancied the Ukraine proposal, and none did. Biden laughed the Ukraine proposal off with a gentle, nice try, pat on Ukraine governments upper arm. Trump has signed it. It just seems very odd Trump thinks this is a great deal for US to get itself into. An Administration that believes its own wild propaganda? Is this the evidence to suspect there’s no clever “art of the deal” games here, what they say is actually what they believe?
Shit weather here today, which is a shame. But some excellent skyscraper architecture to look at. From neo-gothic to art deco to modernist to postmodern to whatever we call contemporary architecture including, though it pains me to say it, the Trump tower which is actually a pretty decent building if you ignore the huge “TRUMP” emblazoned on it.
I’m going to miss the voting because my postal vote didn’t turn up. So Brockley ward wont be turning Lib Dem after all.
Ukraine signed *his* minerals deal. And therefore, Trump (and to a lesser extent the US) has won.
What happens next is irrelevant; he gets to declare victory.
But yes, the plastic reinforces the daylight robbery.
Having said that, a glass of mediocre Cali Chardonnay at the - nice, but certainly far from posh - burger restaurant where I’m having dinner was $12. And there’s no view here.
Enjoy!
I didn't think we would be talking about Kneecap on here.
The presence of private foreign companies has zero deterrent impact.
The only thing that deters an invasion is the presence of foreign soldiers, because shooting at those soldiers is an act of war.
Shooting at the property of foreigners isn't an act of war.
80 seconds of Alastair Campbell suggesting that American animosity to Zelensky came more from Vance than Trump:-
Trump & Zelensky’s quiet Vatican moment
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-HoOn-5K5gQ
ETA you do hear some isolationist Americans (who might or might not have been seeded by Russian trolls) complaining that Churchill tricked Roosevelt into the second world war.
Don't forget your photo ID and to stock up on snacks for the overnight stint. Good luck to all PB candidates and poll workers.
Tesla’s board in March contacted multiple executive placement firms to begin a search process for a new CEO to replace Elon Musk at the helm of the embattled electric car company, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing multiple anonymous sources.
https://bsky.app/profile/cnn.com/post/3lo37mkxuek2d
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/may/01/ukraine-war-live-updates-minerals-deal-us-trump-zelenskyy-latest-news?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
https://open.substack.com/pub/robertsmithson1/p/the-real-story-of-the-spanish-and?r=2a9ngu&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
F1: don't normally comment on special liveries etc, but the Miami Ferrari looks like it got beaten by the ugly stick.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article/gallery-ferrari-reveal-special-co-designed-livery-for-miami-grand-prix.bIA2nDHqo3SYRp150gl00
In a post on social media he said the two countries would establish a reconstruction investment fund with each side having 50% voting rights and made clear that Kyiv would not be asked to pay back any “debt” for US aid during the war.
(Your link)
square with this from Mr Chump:
The minerals deal, which has been the subject of tense negotiations for months and nearly fell through hours before it was signed, will establish a US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund that the Trump administration has said will begin to repay an estimated $175bn in aid provided to Ukraine since the beginning of the war.
(Link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/30/us-ukraine-minerals-deal-russia)
Too many weasel words and overlap; we need the full text.
It's interesting, though peripheral, that the lawyers mentioned as advising Ukraine are Hogan Lovells, who are one of the firms unconstitutionally targeted by Trump's regime via an Executive Order in his aim to extort 100s of $m of free legal representation.
With the information I have, I'd say that this is a generalist set of principles, which Ukraine intend to use to hold the US Govt onside whilst preventing them pivoting to Russia in practice (rather than in their heads) - whilst there is more time for Russia's economy and arms supply to run down.
And that Trump has backed down from his bluster as his balloon popped, as he always does when reality dawns. Trump is looking for corrupt opportunities to use his position to enrich himself, his friends, and his puppet masters.
"Just call me FFS Zubian" *
* FFS = Ferrari FS. HMS Zubian made out of the front of HMS Zulu and the back of HMS Nubian in WW1.