Incredible how little attention this is getting outside Germany. "In its third full day, a ... power failure in Berlin resulting from an arson attack...tens of thousands...making do without heat, electricity, cellphone service & warm food or drinks."
Funny how Sky and BBC aren't particularly reporting this.
Chancellor Merz had time to hobnob with Emmanuel and SKS...
Incredible how little attention this is getting outside Germany. "In its third full day, a ... power failure in Berlin resulting from an arson attack...tens of thousands...making do without heat, electricity, cellphone service & warm food or drinks."
Funny how Sky and BBC aren't particularly reporting this.
They can't get their reports out of Berlin. Apparently there are some power issues...
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
Back to the London poll out this evening and although the changes may look a little "odd" to some, It might be Polanski is picking up some of the pro-Palestinian group votes for a General Election rather than for the locals.
I hope some data tables will be forthcoming particularly with reference to Inner and Outer London. It's easy to think of London as a single homogenous bloc but it isn't - politically, far from it. There will be Con-Lab, Con-LD, Con-Reform, Lab-Green, Lab-Reform, Lab-Independent and any number of other scenarios at work in May.
Where is the Labour weakness more acute, Inner or Outer London and where are Reform and Green strongest - it's probably accurate to argue the former in Outer London and the latter in Inner London but I remind myself constantly Reform polled 15% in the Plaistow by election in November so may have more strength in Labour run Inner London than conventional wisdom would dictate.
"The term was coined in the early 1970s by MIT professor Lincoln P. Bloomfield and his colleagues, including Harland Cleveland of the University of Minnesota.[2] In July 1971, Bloomfield described the need for a coalition of willing nations to support important peacekeeping or conflict stabilization goals endorsed by the UN, in a NYT op-ed.[3] The term was picked up by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in a 1973 letter to Bloomfield, acknowledging the latter's "proposal for 'coalitions of the willing'."[4] On May 9, 1988, Cleveland wrote a letter 'for the record' to the editor of Foreign Affairs making clear that Bloomfield was the originator of the phrase, first published in his 1974 book In Search of American Foreign Policy.[5] In 2002, Bloomfield published another op-ed, insisting that Cleveland share credit for the phrase.[2]"
I think I've been on PB since about 2008/2009 (lurking at first) and from what I've learned, it seems things mostly don't happen.
Most things predicted on PB never happen. I think though you'll find that things in general happen at a pretty constant rate. Perhaps at an entirely constant rate. And if there's any variation it could be a big thing. But we don't know what big means. Or what 'means' means.
We're certainly not very good on PB at predicting what will happen, if the results of the 2025 PB Prediction Competition* are anything to go by.
(*Results which I hope to publish in the next week or so once the last result is in and I have time to collate the numbers.)
I'd find it personally helpful if you don't publish the results on here. Could you just notify the winner(s) privately? We don't need a league table. Thanks.
Yes, I can see from the provisional results why you might.
Though rest assured you are going to be well above that duffer @Benpointer in the published final table.
My only one I remember is 1-1 draw in the Ashes. So I'm not hopeful.
Incredible how little attention this is getting outside Germany. "In its third full day, a ... power failure in Berlin resulting from an arson attack...tens of thousands...making do without heat, electricity, cellphone service & warm food or drinks."
Funny how Sky and BBC aren't particularly reporting this.
Chancellor Merz had time to hobnob with Emmanuel and SKS...
"Learner drivers in England and Wales could face a minimum learning period of up to six months before sitting their practical test, the BBC can reveal."
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
I wasn't accusing you of lying. I just don't agree with your analysis particularly regarding some of Johnson's egregious behaviour which was not called out. Additionally Johnsonian errors were corrected by the BBC ( the Cenotaph) and of course when a Labour MP accused Johnson of lying, Laura Kuennsberg countered with "that is some charge". That said let's agree to disagree and return to the travails of Leyland Cars. We had a friend who worked for the marketing department in Redditch and later near the NEC. The Leyland Cars blue circular logo (derived from the British Leyland symbol) was commonly known as the ar**hole by marketing department staff.
You need a cup of tea whilst reading it, as there is quite a lot of it.
Confident prediction: "invalid carriage" will be replaced with "mobility aid *" or "mobility device".
* Technically this also covers Assistance Dogs and Walking Sticks.
TLDR, plus I’m watching Boon on Rewind TV
Anything about fully legalising electric scooters ?
That would be out of scope for this I think, but separately I expect that electric scooters would be considered in the next year or three. My view on general use of e-scooters is "yes, but limited to a 'slow' mode in pedestrian areas eg pavements or pedestrianised town centres, by which I mean 4mph".
Organisations I deal with want it left up to the person to choose their mobility aid (including scooters and cycles / adapted cycles), but with that same 4mph pavement mode speed limit - as currently applies to mobility scooters and powerchairs. That's partly because it is sensible, and partly because it draws a line that avoids the "but illegal motorbikes" lobby trying to argue that bad behaviour by delivery people should cause mobility aids to be banned.
Back to the London poll out this evening and although the changes may look a little "odd" to some, It might be Polanski is picking up some of the pro-Palestinian group votes for a General Election rather than for the locals.
I hope some data tables will be forthcoming particularly with reference to Inner and Outer London. It's easy to think of London as a single homogenous bloc but it isn't - politically, far from it. There will be Con-Lab, Con-LD, Con-Reform, Lab-Green, Lab-Reform, Lab-Independent and any number of other scenarios at work in May.
Where is the Labour weakness more acute, Inner or Outer London and where are Reform and Green strongest - it's probably accurate to argue the former in Outer London and the latter in Inner London but I remind myself constantly Reform polled 15% in the Plaistow by election in November so may have more strength in Labour run Inner London than conventional wisdom would dictate.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
Incredible how little attention this is getting outside Germany. "In its third full day, a ... power failure in Berlin resulting from an arson attack...tens of thousands...making do without heat, electricity, cellphone service & warm food or drinks."
Funny how Sky and BBC aren't particularly reporting this.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I think I've been on PB since about 2008/2009 (lurking at first) and from what I've learned, it seems things mostly don't happen.
Most things predicted on PB never happen. I think though you'll find that things in general happen at a pretty constant rate. Perhaps at an entirely constant rate. And if there's any variation it could be a big thing. But we don't know what big means. Or what 'means' means.
We're certainly not very good on PB at predicting what will happen, if the results of the 2025 PB Prediction Competition* are anything to go by.
(*Results which I hope to publish in the next week or so once the last result is in and I have time to collate the numbers.)
I'd find it personally helpful if you don't publish the results on here. Could you just notify the winner(s) privately? We don't need a league table. Thanks.
Yes, I can see from the provisional results why you might.
Though rest assured you are going to be well above that duffer @Benpointer in the published final table.
Well,I was in the relegation zone last year. My expectation is the same this year.
I never even bother to enter the competition, for the very good reason that I'm hopeless at prediction.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I find it shocking that this is where we now find ourselves but there is little sense that the 'pb brain's trust' is very bothered or wants to do anything about it.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I find it shocking that this is where we now find ourselves but there is little sense that the 'pb brain's trust' is very bothered or wants to do anything about it.
I think most of us at the time said the police weren't not doing their job and it was frankly embarrassing..
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
Regarding Johnson, it was much more nuanced than you make out.
Yes, he won a majority in December 2019 by getting three quarters of the LEAVE voters and, more importantly, 20% of the REMAIN voters to support him and among the latter were traditional Tories and a number who, whatever reservations they had about Johnson, preferred him to the nightmare which would have been a Corbyn Government.
We will never know what would have happened had the virus not intervened but it did - the truth was, unlike Theresa May, who would, I think, have been well suited to dealing with the crisis, Johnson's personal style of governing wasn't suited to what was required and the measures he needed to take in March 2020 clearly went against every fibre in his being.
The irony was having schemed for 20 years or more to become Prime Minister, the role (or rather his experience of the role) turned out to be the antithesis of what he expected or wanted. In another time and mood, he would have been the perfect leader but the hand he was dealt with was personally and politically a nightmare.
He wanted to be Britain's cheerleader-in-chief but the time required gravitas more than levitas. In the end, he couldn't escape the person he was - gregarious, extrovert and in the mood of the time, when millions were effectively (though not actually) trapped in their homes obeying the rules he himself had promulagated, his failure to be anyone other than himself was his political failure.
In the end, the party which endorsed him so strongly in the summer of 2019 and many of whose MPs owed their success directly to him did what Conservatives tend to do when defeat looks inevitable.
A significant minority among the public really liked Boris - I once mused on here what a Boris Johnson Party would have polled in an election - and many of them have never forgiven the Conservatives for what they did in 2022 (just as some Thatcherites did after 1990) and from that group spawned part of the Reform Party of today - conservatives who are anti-Conservative.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
I forgot to mention Corbyn. Like Blair before him Starmer was a traitor to the left for winning an election when their preference is perennial opposition and the opportunity to carp on about the unfairness of successive Tory governments that they furnished with power.
Fortunately for the left, Your Party are doing everything they can to make sure that they will never leave opposition.
They were attacking the Scottish Greens for being pro-Israel the other week. Which was quite an odd attack line.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I find it shocking that this is where we now find ourselves but there is little sense that the 'pb brain's trust' is very bothered or wants to do anything about it.
What are the great actions of the past that the ‘pb brains trust’ has taken to do something about stuff? What are you suggesting in this case, a march on Lloyd House?
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
The previous poll looks like an outlier. 43% is a very high figure in London for Con and Reform, combined.
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
I wasn't accusing you of lying. I just don't agree with your analysis particularly regarding some of Johnson's egregious behaviour which was not called out. Additionally Johnsonian errors were corrected by the BBC ( the Cenotaph) and of course when a Labour MP accused Johnson of lying, Laura Kuennsberg countered with "that is some charge". That said let's agree to disagree and return to the travails of Leyland Cars. We had a friend who worked for the marketing department in Redditch and later near the NEC. The Leyland Cars blue circular logo (derived from the British Leyland symbol) was commonly known as the ar**hole by marketing department staff.
Sure, I will agree Dodds had a terrible press.
Never realised the marketing department was based in Redditch, Tough job 😉 that blue circular logo was a classic.
One of the reasons I like old TV, I’m watching a Boon from 1987 at the moment on Rewind TV is the old cars. My wife and I went to the steam fair in Lambton grounds last year. We looked at all,the classic cars and I bored her to tears telling her which ones I worked on.
The lighting company I used to work for used to refer to one of the rearlamps as ‘ban the bomb’, a Ford one.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
Territorial expansion is one way that Trump can leave a legacy that can't realistically be unwound by the Democrats because it would change the course of American history.
Back to the London poll out this evening and although the changes may look a little "odd" to some, It might be Polanski is picking up some of the pro-Palestinian group votes for a General Election rather than for the locals.
I hope some data tables will be forthcoming particularly with reference to Inner and Outer London. It's easy to think of London as a single homogenous bloc but it isn't - politically, far from it. There will be Con-Lab, Con-LD, Con-Reform, Lab-Green, Lab-Reform, Lab-Independent and any number of other scenarios at work in May.
Where is the Labour weakness more acute, Inner or Outer London and where are Reform and Green strongest - it's probably accurate to argue the former in Outer London and the latter in Inner London but I remind myself constantly Reform polled 15% in the Plaistow by election in November so may have more strength in Labour run Inner London than conventional wisdom would dictate.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
I think trying to call GE seats on these numbers, without knowing the relative strengths across the capital, is unwise.
On those numbers, for example, Reform might win Bromley & Biggin Hill (they might not). The LDs look safe in their six seats but little threat elsewhere.
The locals will be revealing in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the parties.
One example is in my own patch - Newham - which looks between Labour and the Newham Independents - a strong Green vote could either help the Independents or Labour, I'm not sure which. Some local commentary has suggested a possible coalition between the Newham Indpendents and the Greens to run the Borough if they can get a majority of seats - for example, NIP 24, Greens 12 leaving Labour on 30. Could that happen?
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
Some of it could be about the Gazindies- how much of their vote was really for a profoundly Islamist party, and how much was it just "left wing but don't like Keir"?
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
You need a cup of tea whilst reading it, as there is quite a lot of it.
Confident prediction: "invalid carriage" will be replaced with "mobility aid *" or "mobility device".
* Technically this also covers Assistance Dogs and Walking Sticks.
TLDR, plus I’m watching Boon on Rewind TV
Anything about fully legalising electric scooters ?
That would be out of scope for this I think, but separately I expect that electric scooters would be considered in the next year or three. My view on general use of e-scooters is "yes, but limited to a 'slow' mode in pedestrian areas eg pavements or pedestrianised town centres, by which I mean 4mph".
Organisations I deal with want it left up to the person to choose their mobility aid (including scooters and cycles / adapted cycles), but with that same 4mph pavement mode speed limit - as currently applies to mobility scooters and powerchairs. That's partly because it is sensible, and partly because it draws a line that avoids the "but illegal motorbikes" lobby trying to argue that bad behaviour by delivery people should cause mobility aids to be banned.
I’d agree with that but illegal electric bikes really are a problem for lots of communities. Where I live we have had issues in town of chavs on Sur-Ron’s with face masks making a nuisance of themselves.
A north east MP wants fines for the ski mask wearers. I assume this wouldn’t apply to me on my bike as I wear one in winter
We should welcome mobility aids. Especially for short journeys. At the moment I can either cycle, jog or walk into town. In a decade or so maybe not so I’d drive.
Back to the London poll out this evening and although the changes may look a little "odd" to some, It might be Polanski is picking up some of the pro-Palestinian group votes for a General Election rather than for the locals.
I hope some data tables will be forthcoming particularly with reference to Inner and Outer London. It's easy to think of London as a single homogenous bloc but it isn't - politically, far from it. There will be Con-Lab, Con-LD, Con-Reform, Lab-Green, Lab-Reform, Lab-Independent and any number of other scenarios at work in May.
Where is the Labour weakness more acute, Inner or Outer London and where are Reform and Green strongest - it's probably accurate to argue the former in Outer London and the latter in Inner London but I remind myself constantly Reform polled 15% in the Plaistow by election in November so may have more strength in Labour run Inner London than conventional wisdom would dictate.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
I think trying to call GE seats on these numbers, without knowing the relative strengths across the capital, is unwise.
On those numbers, for example, Reform might win Bromley & Biggin Hill (they might not). The LDs look safe in their six seats but little threat elsewhere.
The locals will be revealing in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the parties.
One example is in my own patch - Newham - which looks between Labour and the Newham Independents - a strong Green vote could either help the Independents or Labour, I'm not sure which. Some local commentary has suggested a possible coalition between the Newham Indpendents and the Greens to run the Borough if they can get a majority of seats - for example, NIP 24, Greens 12 leaving Labour on 30. Could that happen?
A deal after the election is no good if they have pushed each other to a stalemate before the election. As with LibLab in 2024, there surely won't be a Sordid Deal- are the principlals mature enough to (say) accidentally leave their campaign plans in the gents at Westfield where the other lot manage to pick them up?
Thank you for those expressing their condolences on our family loses
None of them were expected but at our ages it is life
Tomorrow is the first anniversary of my MiL's death. She would have been 90 on 2nd January this year. Her departure has left a real gap in all of our lives. We always went to see her on her birthday and New Year just did not feel the same this year. But this is the circle of life, I suppose.
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
Regarding Johnson, it was much more nuanced than you make out.
Yes, he won a majority in December 2019 by getting three quarters of the LEAVE voters and, more importantly, 20% of the REMAIN voters to support him and among the latter were traditional Tories and a number who, whatever reservations they had about Johnson, preferred him to the nightmare which would have been a Corbyn Government.
We will never know what would have happened had the virus not intervened but it did - the truth was, unlike Theresa May, who would, I think, have been well suited to dealing with the crisis, Johnson's personal style of governing wasn't suited to what was required and the measures he needed to take in March 2020 clearly went against every fibre in his being.
The irony was having schemed for 20 years or more to become Prime Minister, the role (or rather his experience of the role) turned out to be the antithesis of what he expected or wanted. In another time and mood, he would have been the perfect leader but the hand he was dealt with was personally and politically a nightmare.
He wanted to be Britain's cheerleader-in-chief but the time required gravitas more than levitas. In the end, he couldn't escape the person he was - gregarious, extrovert and in the mood of the time, when millions were effectively (though not actually) trapped in their homes obeying the rules he himself had promulagated, his failure to be anyone other than himself was his political failure.
In the end, the party which endorsed him so strongly in the summer of 2019 and many of whose MPs owed their success directly to him did what Conservatives tend to do when defeat looks inevitable.
A significant minority among the public really liked Boris - I once mused on here what a Boris Johnson Party would have polled in an election - and many of them have never forgiven the Conservatives for what they did in 2022 (just as some Thatcherites did after 1990) and from that group spawned part of the Reform Party of today - conservatives who are anti-Conservative.
Don’t disagree with your assessment. I’m specifically referring to the press coverage he got and how the press turned on him. Especially over so-called parties.
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
Regarding Johnson, it was much more nuanced than you make out.
Yes, he won a majority in December 2019 by getting three quarters of the LEAVE voters and, more importantly, 20% of the REMAIN voters to support him and among the latter were traditional Tories and a number who, whatever reservations they had about Johnson, preferred him to the nightmare which would have been a Corbyn Government.
We will never know what would have happened had the virus not intervened but it did - the truth was, unlike Theresa May, who would, I think, have been well suited to dealing with the crisis, Johnson's personal style of governing wasn't suited to what was required and the measures he needed to take in March 2020 clearly went against every fibre in his being.
The irony was having schemed for 20 years or more to become Prime Minister, the role (or rather his experience of the role) turned out to be the antithesis of what he expected or wanted. In another time and mood, he would have been the perfect leader but the hand he was dealt with was personally and politically a nightmare.
He wanted to be Britain's cheerleader-in-chief but the time required gravitas more than levitas. In the end, he couldn't escape the person he was - gregarious, extrovert and in the mood of the time, when millions were effectively (though not actually) trapped in their homes obeying the rules he himself had promulagated, his failure to be anyone other than himself was his political failure.
In the end, the party which endorsed him so strongly in the summer of 2019 and many of whose MPs owed their success directly to him did what Conservatives tend to do when defeat looks inevitable.
A significant minority among the public really liked Boris - I once mused on here what a Boris Johnson Party would have polled in an election - and many of them have never forgiven the Conservatives for what they did in 2022 (just as some Thatcherites did after 1990) and from that group spawned part of the Reform Party of today - conservatives who are anti-Conservative.
There is or was no time or mood that would have transformed that lazy twat into the perfect leader.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
Territorial expansion is one way that Trump can leave a legacy that can't realistically be unwound by the Democrats because it would change the course of American history.
The Democrats could just return it with an embarrassed apology. For an avowedly anti-drugs administration they're doing a very good impression of coked-up megalomaniacs.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
If Anas fell on his sword, or was pushed onto his sword, would Jackie Baillie step up or continue lying on the sidelines?
Donald Trump has agreed to both **deter** attacks by Russia and - if it comes to it - **defend** Ukraine in the event of a peace deal with Russia
Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, says that the commitment is 'as strong as anyone has ever seen'
'The president strongly stands behind security protocols. Those security protocols are meant to a) deter any attacks in Ukraine and b) if there are any attacks they are meant to defend. And they will do both.
'They are as strong as anyone has ever seen. The president does not back down from his commitments. He is strong for the country of Ukraine and for a peace deal. And we will be there for the Ukrainians in helping them to get to that final peace'’
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
Regarding Johnson, it was much more nuanced than you make out.
Yes, he won a majority in December 2019 by getting three quarters of the LEAVE voters and, more importantly, 20% of the REMAIN voters to support him and among the latter were traditional Tories and a number who, whatever reservations they had about Johnson, preferred him to the nightmare which would have been a Corbyn Government.
We will never know what would have happened had the virus not intervened but it did - the truth was, unlike Theresa May, who would, I think, have been well suited to dealing with the crisis, Johnson's personal style of governing wasn't suited to what was required and the measures he needed to take in March 2020 clearly went against every fibre in his being.
The irony was having schemed for 20 years or more to become Prime Minister, the role (or rather his experience of the role) turned out to be the antithesis of what he expected or wanted. In another time and mood, he would have been the perfect leader but the hand he was dealt with was personally and politically a nightmare.
He wanted to be Britain's cheerleader-in-chief but the time required gravitas more than levitas. In the end, he couldn't escape the person he was - gregarious, extrovert and in the mood of the time, when millions were effectively (though not actually) trapped in their homes obeying the rules he himself had promulagated, his failure to be anyone other than himself was his political failure.
In the end, the party which endorsed him so strongly in the summer of 2019 and many of whose MPs owed their success directly to him did what Conservatives tend to do when defeat looks inevitable.
A significant minority among the public really liked Boris - I once mused on here what a Boris Johnson Party would have polled in an election - and many of them have never forgiven the Conservatives for what they did in 2022 (just as some Thatcherites did after 1990) and from that group spawned part of the Reform Party of today - conservatives who are anti-Conservative.
Don’t disagree with your assessment. I’m specifically referring to the press coverage he got and how the press turned on him. Especially over so-called parties.
But Boris survived Partygate. The Conservatives didn't do that badly in the 2022 local elections, and he won the subsequent vote of confidence 211-148. He probably wouldn't have survived "telling lies about the parties"gate, but even that isn't what got him. It was "lying about keeping Pincher the Pincher in the Whips' Office"gate that brought him down.
OK, that was the one that affected Conservative MPs personally, but if my boss put a sex pest as the person I had to report to in HR, I'd be pretty narked as well.
TLDR: Boris was bound to bring Boris down. He couldn't help himself.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
Some of it could be about the Gazindies- how much of their vote was really for a profoundly Islamist party, and how much was it just "left wing but don't like Keir"?
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
I don’t really know London that well, apart from the Lib Dem part as I have friends there. Where else would be fertile territory for Reform, or would they expect to gain ?
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
If Anas fell on his sword, or was pushed onto his sword, would Jackie Baillie step up or continue lying on the sidelines?
Anas isn't competent enough to fall on his sword; he'd miss.
You need a cup of tea whilst reading it, as there is quite a lot of it.
Confident prediction: "invalid carriage" will be replaced with "mobility aid *" or "mobility device".
* Technically this also covers Assistance Dogs and Walking Sticks.
TLDR, plus I’m watching Boon on Rewind TV
Anything about fully legalising electric scooters ?
That would be out of scope for this I think, but separately I expect that electric scooters would be considered in the next year or three. My view on general use of e-scooters is "yes, but limited to a 'slow' mode in pedestrian areas eg pavements or pedestrianised town centres, by which I mean 4mph".
Organisations I deal with want it left up to the person to choose their mobility aid (including scooters and cycles / adapted cycles), but with that same 4mph pavement mode speed limit - as currently applies to mobility scooters and powerchairs. That's partly because it is sensible, and partly because it draws a line that avoids the "but illegal motorbikes" lobby trying to argue that bad behaviour by delivery people should cause mobility aids to be banned.
I’d agree with that but illegal electric bikes really are a problem for lots of communities. Where I live we have had issues in town of chavs on Sur-Ron’s with face masks making a nuisance of themselves.
A north east MP wants fines for the ski mask wearers. I assume this wouldn’t apply to me on my bike as I wear one in winter
We should welcome mobility aids. Especially for short journeys. At the moment I can either cycle, jog or walk into town. In a decade or so maybe not so I’d drive.
Yes, I agree. The illegal bikes (ie mopeds) are an enforcement question, and it varies by police force. Ours here walk around giving out bits of paper saying "please, don't".
My view on this has changed, as I have come across real people who actually do say "Powered wheelchairs for disabled people can never be acceptable in the pedestrian area; a food delivery person nearly knocked me over last year." It needs some sort of demarcation as a comfort factor - at least for some time.
That reminds me of the illogic of the bans on town centre cycling in say Mansfield or Scunthorpe. In Mansfield, they had one or maybe two incidents of poor behaviour by 13-14 year olds in the outdoor market area, and imposed a complete ban over a large area - which left kids going to sports pushing their cycles for 10 minutes across an empty, dark town centre in winter, or cycling the inner ring road, or getting parents to transport them.
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
That is patently untrue. Mrs May got a rough ride, Sunak got a rough ride as did Starmer. The press and media were very supportive of Johnson and Truss (until they both unravelled). Probably 1 in 20 Starmer-negative stories in the Mail, Telegraph and GBNews have had any validity. Reeves has never been liked, but not with as much enthusiastic hatred as they had for Dodds.
Don’t agree and I am not in the habit of telling lies. I’m offering a view with support.
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
Regarding Johnson, it was much more nuanced than you make out.
Yes, he won a majority in December 2019 by getting three quarters of the LEAVE voters and, more importantly, 20% of the REMAIN voters to support him and among the latter were traditional Tories and a number who, whatever reservations they had about Johnson, preferred him to the nightmare which would have been a Corbyn Government.
We will never know what would have happened had the virus not intervened but it did - the truth was, unlike Theresa May, who would, I think, have been well suited to dealing with the crisis, Johnson's personal style of governing wasn't suited to what was required and the measures he needed to take in March 2020 clearly went against every fibre in his being.
The irony was having schemed for 20 years or more to become Prime Minister, the role (or rather his experience of the role) turned out to be the antithesis of what he expected or wanted. In another time and mood, he would have been the perfect leader but the hand he was dealt with was personally and politically a nightmare.
He wanted to be Britain's cheerleader-in-chief but the time required gravitas more than levitas. In the end, he couldn't escape the person he was - gregarious, extrovert and in the mood of the time, when millions were effectively (though not actually) trapped in their homes obeying the rules he himself had promulagated, his failure to be anyone other than himself was his political failure.
In the end, the party which endorsed him so strongly in the summer of 2019 and many of whose MPs owed their success directly to him did what Conservatives tend to do when defeat looks inevitable.
A significant minority among the public really liked Boris - I once mused on here what a Boris Johnson Party would have polled in an election - and many of them have never forgiven the Conservatives for what they did in 2022 (just as some Thatcherites did after 1990) and from that group spawned part of the Reform Party of today - conservatives who are anti-Conservative.
Don’t disagree with your assessment. I’m specifically referring to the press coverage he got and how the press turned on him. Especially over so-called parties.
But Boris survived Partygate. The Conservatives didn't do that badly in the 2022 local elections, and he won the subsequent vote of confidence 211-148. He probably wouldn't have survived "telling lies about the parties"gate, but even that isn't what got him. It was "lying about keeping Pincher the Pincher in the Whips' Office"gate that brought him down.
OK, that was the one that affected Conservative MPs personally, but if my boss put a sex pest as the person I had to report to in HR, I'd be pretty narked as well.
TLDR: Boris was bound to bring Boris down. He couldn't help himself.
The start of the end for Boris, IIRC, was him going into bat for Owen Paterson after being persuaded to.
If he had not stood down in a fit of pique he’d have certainly faced a recall petition and it would have got the relevant signatures.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
If Anas fell on his sword, or was pushed onto his sword, would Jackie Baillie step up or continue lying on the sidelines?
Anas isn't competent enough to fall on his sword; he'd miss.
John Rentoul has forecast he will be Scottish First Minister after the Holyrood elections.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
If Anas fell on his sword, or was pushed onto his sword, would Jackie Baillie step up or continue lying on the sidelines?
Anas isn't competent enough to fall on his sword; he'd miss.
John Rentoul has forecast he will be Scottish First Minister after the Holyrood elections.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
Can the SNP gain many more seats under the Scottish electoral system? I think they're pretty much maxed out, hence indy voters being better advised to cast their second (AMS) vote for Alba / Green as they don't win many constituencies, so top the d'hondt list.
@NatashaBertrand The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
A nice utility called Inspire that shows you all the plot outlines in the country (I think), from the Land Registry.
I'm currently using it to understand the location of a row of dodgy (= several need to be removed) bollards in Congleton. The problem being that no one knows, who's land they are on, or who put them there.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
There is about a 3% swing from SNP to Labour since 2021 on the latest Holyrood constituency polls
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
If Anas fell on his sword, or was pushed onto his sword, would Jackie Baillie step up or continue lying on the sidelines?
Anas isn't competent enough to fall on his sword; he'd miss.
John Rentoul has forecast he will be Scottish First Minister after the Holyrood elections.
Fairliered has forecast he won’t be.
I suspect you, rather than he, will prove to be correct !
@NatashaBertrand The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
The more European leaders get squeamish about the US "acquiring" Greenland, the more the US delights in trolling them, it appears.
At least that would be the charitable explanation, the uncharitable one just being they're now a batshit insane rogue superpower.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
Some of it could be about the Gazindies- how much of their vote was really for a profoundly Islamist party, and how much was it just "left wing but don't like Keir"?
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
I don’t really know London that well, apart from the Lib Dem part as I have friends there. Where else would be fertile territory for Reform, or would they expect to gain ?
Depends how expansive they want to go. This is allegedly their target map;
The boroughs that voted leave in 2016 were Havering, Barking & Dagenham, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon. They're all places that feel a long way from London Proper, and in many cases would rather not have anything to do with the smoke. (That's Reform's problem in places like Bromley and Croydon. Both boroughs have patches like that, but they reach in as far as the Crystal Palace, where the anti-London, anti-Sadiq stuff just doesn't wash.)
If they don't win Havering, Reform have outright failed. Pick up B&D or Bexley as well, and they have a solid result in outer East London. Win somewhere like Hillingdon as well, and it gets interesting, because that means they have broken out of their Eastern bias.
@NatashaBertrand The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
Some of it could be about the Gazindies- how much of their vote was really for a profoundly Islamist party, and how much was it just "left wing but don't like Keir"?
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
I don’t really know London that well, apart from the Lib Dem part as I have friends there. Where else would be fertile territory for Reform, or would they expect to gain ?
Depends how expansive they want to go. This is allegedly their target map;
The boroughs that voted leave in 2016 were Havering, Barking & Dagenham, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon. They're all places that feel a long way from London Proper, and in many cases would rather not have anything to do with the smoke. (That's Reform's problem in places like Bromley and Croydon. Both boroughs have patches like that, but they reach in as far as the Crystal Palace, where the anti-London, anti-Sadiq stuff just doesn't wash.)
If they don't win Havering, Reform have outright failed. Pick up B&D or Bexley as well, and they have a solid result in outer East London. Win somewhere like Hillingdon as well, and it gets interesting, because that means they have broken out of their Eastern bias.
Is that the same Eastern bias that causes them to support Putin?
@NatashaBertrand The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
Leavitt out!
I think it's time that Europe recognised that we are an adversary.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I find it shocking that this is where we now find ourselves but there is little sense that the 'pb brain's trust' is very bothered or wants to do anything about it.
As I said, PB has become hive mind of "centrist dads" unwilling to say anything even a little bit controversial or out of step with the liberal consensus. PB of old would have had a header about the subject and put the boot in. Today it's just silence and knuckling under Islamist threats.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
After all his guff about being next FM, in that scenario would Anas step down or will his customary brass neck keep him going on?
If Anas fell on his sword, or was pushed onto his sword, would Jackie Baillie step up or continue lying on the sidelines?
Anas isn't competent enough to fall on his sword; he'd miss.
John Rentoul has forecast he will be Scottish First Minister after the Holyrood elections.
Fairliered has forecast he won’t be.
I suspect you, rather than he, will prove to be correct !
A question for @Benpointer for his 2026 prediction competition.
A nice utility called Inspire that shows you all the plot outlines in the country (I think), from the Land Registry.
I'm currently using it to understand the location of a row of dodgy (= several need to be removed) bollards in Congleton. The problem being that no one knows, who's land they are on, or who put them there.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
Some of it could be about the Gazindies- how much of their vote was really for a profoundly Islamist party, and how much was it just "left wing but don't like Keir"?
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
I don’t really know London that well, apart from the Lib Dem part as I have friends there. Where else would be fertile territory for Reform, or would they expect to gain ?
Reform would run close in Eltham and Chislehurst, Orpington, and Bromley & Biggin Hill, on these numbers. They need to get a huge vote share, before they can expect lots of seats in London.
Polling by Savanta - fieldwork 13th - 21st December, changes from a poll whose fieldwork was 31st October - 7th November.
Poor poll for Reform and the Conservatives and a huge poll for the Greens who on these numbers are going to challenge Labour strongly in Inner London (places like Hackney and Lewisham).
Not sure what these shares, if repeated in a GE, would mean for seats though I imagine not good for either Labour or the Conservatives.
Those changes look a bit odd.
Yes, an 8-point swing from CON/REFUK to LAB/LD/GREEN is very unusual. Most of the movement has been within those blocks, rather than from one of them to the other.
Some of it could be about the Gazindies- how much of their vote was really for a profoundly Islamist party, and how much was it just "left wing but don't like Keir"?
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors.
The Tories would gain Two Cities, Fulham & Chelsea, Uxbridge, Hendon, Chipping Barnet.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
I don’t really know London that well, apart from the Lib Dem part as I have friends there. Where else would be fertile territory for Reform, or would they expect to gain ?
Depends how expansive they want to go. This is allegedly their target map;
The boroughs that voted leave in 2016 were Havering, Barking & Dagenham, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon. They're all places that feel a long way from London Proper, and in many cases would rather not have anything to do with the smoke. (That's Reform's problem in places like Bromley and Croydon. Both boroughs have patches like that, but they reach in as far as the Crystal Palace, where the anti-London, anti-Sadiq stuff just doesn't wash.)
If they don't win Havering, Reform have outright failed. Pick up B&D or Bexley as well, and they have a solid result in outer East London. Win somewhere like Hillingdon as well, and it gets interesting, because that means they have broken out of their Eastern bias.
@NatashaBertrand The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
The more European leaders get squeamish about the US "acquiring" Greenland, the more the US delights in trolling them, it appears.
At least that would be the charitable explanation, the uncharitable one just being they're now a batshit insane rogue superpower.
Is there any reason to doubt that Trumpistan is a batshit insane rogue superpower?
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
Reform will also likely take a few SNP seats
I expect Reform wins to be mostly regional seats. The SNP only have 2, which SNP constituency seats do you think Reform might take?
@NatashaBertrand The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
The more European leaders get squeamish about the US "acquiring" Greenland, the more the US delights in trolling them, it appears.
At least that would be the charitable explanation, the uncharitable one just being they're now a batshit insane rogue superpower.
Is there any reason to doubt that Trumpistan is a batshit insane rogue superpower?
I give Starmer a strong chance of surviving this year but far less chance of leading into the election. The value exit bets are 27/28 imo.
Starmer is almost into his seventh year (in position six years from April) of absolute hatred from the hostile media. He was hated as Shadow Brexit Secretary (when Brexit was popular). He was despised for calling out Johnson during COVID (when Johnson was popular) and he won a landslide on a small percentage of the vote and since then his comms have been awful and it has been very much continuity Sunak, which isn't what we voted for.
Starmer hasn't overseen anything criminally disgusting or borderline traitorous and like one of his recent predecessors ( KGB parties) and the man leading in the polls ( friendship with Gill) he hasn't bet the nation on a hunch to protect the Tory Party like another, and whilst the country is bumping along the bottom, his government haven't crashed the economy in 49 days like Liz Truss, and he has towed a solid statemanlike line with Trump and wth Europe, yet he is vilified considerably more than any of them. Take the post Venezuela-heist, Starmer has trodden a diplomatic line, and what else can he do under the circumstances? Today's clarification over Greenland from European leaders was welcome but in the Tory media this has not abated his claimed equivocation. Yet Badenoch has made an absolute howler today which goes unpunished.
And for all that Starmer needs to go.
Not just that.
The right hate him because Boris blew himself up.
The left hate him because Jeremy blew himself up.
Much easier to blame Boring Old Starmer than admit that their own personally flaws destroyed both Bozza and Jez and the projects they embodied.
Starmer is just getting the same sort of media treatment Boris, Truss and Sunak got and should Farage or Badenoch become PM they’d get the same too. It’s all about polar extremes and driving engagement,
Starmer had a far kinder press before the 24 election, as did Reeves.
Boris didn't have a hostile press, he oversaw rampant COVID corruption, protected ministers who should have resigned and didn't declare an £800k loan, only going because his own ministers could no longer stomach him. Truss was epically incompetent, only Rishi could claim to have had a hostile press.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I find it shocking that this is where we now find ourselves but there is little sense that the 'pb brain's trust' is very bothered or wants to do anything about it.
Have you not read pb? The Chief Rozzer will have to go, although to be fair, I think the police position was a bit more nuanced than critics have it. The fear was not Maccabi ultras attacking the locals (the caricatured police position) or locals attacking Maccabi fans (the anti-police position) but that both sides were up for a fight.
Much will depend on the NEV in May's local elections. Even if Reform win if the Tories beat Labour then Starmer will likely go. If Labour beat the Tories though (coupled with some gains from the SNP at Holyrood on the swing from SNP to Labour since 2021) then it Sir Keir will likely survive and it will be Kemi going
I think based on recent-ish polling, the chance of SLAB taking Holyrood seats from the SNP are really quite remote.
They may take a few seats from the SNP, but not as many as they will lose to Reform, so a net gain to the SNP. Reform in second place.
Reform will also likely take a few SNP seats
I expect Reform wins to be mostly regional seats. The SNP only have 2, which SNP constituency seats do you think Reform might take?
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
I find it shocking that this is where we now find ourselves but there is little sense that the 'pb brain's trust' is very bothered or wants to do anything about it.
As I said, PB has become hive mind of "centrist dads" unwilling to say anything even a little bit controversial or out of step with the liberal consensus. PB of old would have had a header about the subject and put the boot in. Today it's just silence and knuckling under Islamist threats.
I saw the news earlier, hadn’t been on PB all day so did a search for ‘Villa’ on todays threads before posting about it, because I thought I’d be repeating old news. But there was no mention of it, which I found surprising
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
One of the things that cuts against a US effort to seize Greenland by force is that I believe this is one of the few issues where you'd see serious high-level protest & resignations within the US armed forces. Every senior US military officer has experience with Europeans & with NATO. The legal contortions involved would also be more self-evidently absurd.
NEW: Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers that recent administration threats against Greenland didn’t signal an imminent invasion and that the goal is to buy the island from Denmark, according to people familiar with the discussions.
"Learner drivers in England and Wales could face a minimum learning period of up to six months before sitting their practical test, the BBC can reveal."
Driving age up to 17.5 by stealth.
In reality, most do about this anyway.
I took 5 months from my 17th birthday to pass my test.
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
And that's our problem. We all know it, but those in power don't have the luxury of being able to say it. Because telling Trump that he's mad is likely to end badly.
I've got lots of sympathy for any Western leader trying to navigate their way round this. I've even got a bit (but only a bit) of sympathy for members of the US administration. Yes, it's obvious that they should call this out and/or leave. But anyone who has had a really sociopathic boss knows that, for all the right thing is obvious, it's never quite as easy as that.
White House: Trump and his team discussing options to acquire Greenland
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
It's the art of the deal. Eventually the resolution will be Denmark paying the US $1-2bn per year for a naval base in Greenland on a 100 year lease and a ratchet which gives the US some kind of mineral or drilling rights as part of it.
Trump didn't invade Venezuala, he removed the obstacle that prevented a deal being done that would deliver billions for US companies. I don't think the Greenland deal will be different, the implied threat of military action will be used to remove the obstacles to a permanent US military presence and mineral/oil rights for US companies.
He is the deals president, everything is measured in short term billions for US companies and nothing more. He doesn't give a fuck about Greenland or the people who live there, it's all about getting Denmark to pay up for his protection racket and gaining rights to natural resources for US companies.
A nice utility called Inspire that shows you all the plot outlines in the country (I think), from the Land Registry.
I'm currently using it to understand the location of a row of dodgy (= several need to be removed) bollards in Congleton. The problem being that no one knows, who's land they are on, or who put them there.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_willing#
Johnson was taking flak over wallpaper and other trivia like his domestic arrangements from early on. He was regularly savaged over Covid by a press who wanted him to go further and faster and then we had all the crap about parties which was covered relentlessly. The public was supportive of him, if the media was supportive it lasted a very short time until Covid came along.
Truss, all I saw was criticism of her as a PM. Sure she got praise from some in her prior role for the trade deals she negotiated (rolled over) but even then there were reports of her conduct being a bit twattish. As a PM she was out of her depth and the public knew it so the press followed rapidly.
Sunak was loved as chancellor when he was giving people free money.
I hope some data tables will be forthcoming particularly with reference to Inner and Outer London. It's easy to think of London as a single homogenous bloc but it isn't - politically, far from it. There will be Con-Lab, Con-LD, Con-Reform, Lab-Green, Lab-Reform, Lab-Independent and any number of other scenarios at work in May.
Where is the Labour weakness more acute, Inner or Outer London and where are Reform and Green strongest - it's probably accurate to argue the former in Outer London and the latter in Inner London but I remind myself constantly Reform polled 15% in the Plaistow by election in November so may have more strength in Labour run Inner London than conventional wisdom would dictate.
Anything about fully legalising electric scooters ?
"The term was coined in the early 1970s by MIT professor Lincoln P. Bloomfield and his colleagues, including Harland Cleveland of the University of Minnesota.[2] In July 1971, Bloomfield described the need for a coalition of willing nations to support important peacekeeping or conflict stabilization goals endorsed by the UN, in a NYT op-ed.[3] The term was picked up by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in a 1973 letter to Bloomfield, acknowledging the latter's "proposal for 'coalitions of the willing'."[4] On May 9, 1988, Cleveland wrote a letter 'for the record' to the editor of Foreign Affairs making clear that Bloomfield was the originator of the phrase, first published in his 1974 book In Search of American Foreign Policy.[5] In 2002, Bloomfield published another op-ed, insisting that Cleveland share credit for the phrase.[2]"
https://www.sci.news/archaeology/mammoth-bone-structures-ukraine-14448.html
18, 000 year old buildings constructed from mammoth bones and used for 500. It all sounds a bit Flintstones.
"Hindus warn Labour against ‘chilling’ Islamophobia definition
Proposed definition of ‘anti-Muslim hostility’ could suppress criticism of Islam, community leaders say"
Does anyone actually care?
Is it another one of those things to keep quiet about so as not to encourage the far right?
Driving age up to 17.5 by stealth.
Organisations I deal with want it left up to the person to choose their mobility aid (including scooters and cycles / adapted cycles), but with that same 4mph pavement mode speed limit - as currently applies to mobility scooters and powerchairs. That's partly because it is sensible, and partly because it draws a line that avoids the "but illegal motorbikes" lobby trying to argue that bad behaviour by delivery people should cause mobility aids to be banned.
Reform would gain Bexleyheath and Crayford, Dagenham & Rainham, Romford, and Hornchurch & Westminster.
They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.
We have had enough of this in Britain.
The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.
The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.
https://x.com/kemibadenoch/status/2008591610636886505?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Yes, he won a majority in December 2019 by getting three quarters of the LEAVE voters and, more importantly, 20% of the REMAIN voters to support him and among the latter were traditional Tories and a number who, whatever reservations they had about Johnson, preferred him to the nightmare which would have been a Corbyn Government.
We will never know what would have happened had the virus not intervened but it did - the truth was, unlike Theresa May, who would, I think, have been well suited to dealing with the crisis, Johnson's personal style of governing wasn't suited to what was required and the measures he needed to take in March 2020 clearly went against every fibre in his being.
The irony was having schemed for 20 years or more to become Prime Minister, the role (or rather his experience of the role) turned out to be the antithesis of what he expected or wanted. In another time and mood, he would have been the perfect leader but the hand he was dealt with was personally and politically a nightmare.
He wanted to be Britain's cheerleader-in-chief but the time required gravitas more than levitas. In the end, he couldn't escape the person he was - gregarious, extrovert and in the mood of the time, when millions were effectively (though not actually) trapped in their homes obeying the rules he himself had promulagated, his failure to be anyone other than himself was his political failure.
In the end, the party which endorsed him so strongly in the summer of 2019 and many of whose MPs owed their success directly to him did what Conservatives tend to do when defeat looks inevitable.
A significant minority among the public really liked Boris - I once mused on here what a Boris Johnson Party would have polled in an election - and many of them have never forgiven the Conservatives for what they did in 2022 (just as some Thatcherites did after 1990) and from that group spawned part of the Reform Party of today - conservatives who are anti-Conservative.
What on earth is she talking about?
Donald Trump and his team are discussing a range of methods for acquiring Greenland.
The US president has repeatedly made clear getting ahold of the territory is a "national security priority".
In a statement, the White House adds that "utilising the US military is always an option".
In response to queries from Reuters, it says:
"President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it's vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief's disposal."
Efforts to take control of it include buying the territory or forming a compact of free association with the island, Reuters reports, citing a senior US official.
They add that Trump wants the US to get ahold of Greenland during this current term in office and the issue is "not going away", despite objections from other NATO leaders.
https://news.sky.com/story/venezuela-live-trump-maduro-court-capture-strikes-colombia-greenland-latest-13489831
Never realised the marketing department was based in Redditch, Tough job 😉 that blue circular logo was a classic.
One of the reasons I like old TV, I’m watching a Boon from 1987 at the moment on Rewind TV is the old cars. My wife and I went to the steam fair in Lambton grounds last year. We looked at all,the classic cars and I bored her to tears telling her which ones I worked on.
The lighting company I used to work for used to refer to one of the rearlamps as ‘ban the bomb’, a Ford one.
On those numbers, for example, Reform might win Bromley & Biggin Hill (they might not). The LDs look safe in their six seats but little threat elsewhere.
The locals will be revealing in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of the parties.
One example is in my own patch - Newham - which looks between Labour and the Newham Independents - a strong Green vote could either help the Independents or Labour, I'm not sure which. Some local commentary has suggested a possible coalition between the Newham Indpendents and the Greens to run the Borough if they can get a majority of seats - for example, NIP 24, Greens 12 leaving Labour on 30. Could that happen?
Macron wants France’s bistros listed on Unesco heritage list
But also- if everyone is rounded to the nearest percent (and that should really be nearest three percent, remember), the more parties in play, the more the total effect of the rounding errors. If that is the endgame, the three seats in Havering and one in Bexley, that feels a bit disappointing for Reform. Not much follow-through for all the fart.
A north east MP wants fines for the ski mask wearers. I assume this wouldn’t apply to me on my bike as I wear one in winter
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9d965zeqpjo
We should welcome mobility aids. Especially for short journeys. At the moment I can either cycle, jog or walk into town. In a decade or so maybe not so I’d drive.
https://x.com/trail_cams/status/2008477609085071719?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
‘ BREAKING:
Donald Trump has agreed to both **deter** attacks by Russia and - if it comes to it - **defend** Ukraine in the event of a peace deal with Russia
Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, says that the commitment is 'as strong as anyone has ever seen'
'The president strongly stands behind security protocols. Those security protocols are meant to a) deter any attacks in Ukraine and b) if there are any attacks they are meant to defend. And they will do both.
'They are as strong as anyone has ever seen. The president does not back down from his commitments. He is strong for the country of Ukraine and for a peace deal. And we will be there for the Ukrainians in helping them to get to that final peace'’
https://x.com/steven_swinford/status/2008619714202005537?s=61
https://x.com/LordWalney/status/2008584379241464175
OK, that was the one that affected Conservative MPs personally, but if my boss put a sex pest as the person I had to report to in HR, I'd be pretty narked as well.
TLDR: Boris was bound to bring Boris down. He couldn't help himself.
My view on this has changed, as I have come across real people who actually do say "Powered wheelchairs for disabled people can never be acceptable in the pedestrian area; a food delivery person nearly knocked me over last year." It needs some sort of demarcation as a comfort factor - at least for some time.
That reminds me of the illogic of the bans on town centre cycling in say Mansfield or Scunthorpe. In Mansfield, they had one or maybe two incidents of poor behaviour by 13-14 year olds in the outdoor market area, and imposed a complete ban over a large area - which left kids going to sports pushing their cycles for 10 minutes across an empty, dark town centre in winter, or cycling the inner ring road, or getting parents to transport them.
If he had not stood down in a fit of pique he’d have certainly faced a recall petition and it would have got the relevant signatures.
The White House says in new statement: “President Trump has made it well known that acquiring Greenland is a national security priority of the United States, and it’s vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to CNN.
I'm currently using it to understand the location of a row of dodgy (= several need to be removed) bollards in Congleton. The problem being that no one knows, who's land they are on, or who put them there.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=36955cea877447f3a1bbbab8067a2a32
Zoom in to your location, but not too far.
At least that would be the charitable explanation, the uncharitable one just being they're now a batshit insane rogue superpower.
https://www.londoncentric.media/p/reform-uk-leaked-candidate-training-nigel-farage-london
The boroughs that voted leave in 2016 were Havering, Barking & Dagenham, Bexley, Sutton and Hillingdon. They're all places that feel a long way from London Proper, and in many cases would rather not have anything to do with the smoke. (That's Reform's problem in places like Bromley and Croydon. Both boroughs have patches like that, but they reach in as far as the Crystal Palace, where the anti-London, anti-Sadiq stuff just doesn't wash.)
If they don't win Havering, Reform have outright failed.
Pick up B&D or Bexley as well, and they have a solid result in outer East London.
Win somewhere like Hillingdon as well, and it gets interesting, because that means they have broken out of their Eastern bias.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gjln4gaeeg
Thank you.
Will Nuuk get an NHL franchise?
Shashank Joshi
@shashj
One of the things that cuts against a US effort to seize Greenland by force is that I believe this is one of the few issues where you'd see serious high-level protest & resignations within the US armed forces. Every senior US military officer has experience with Europeans & with NATO. The legal contortions involved would also be more self-evidently absurd.
https://x.com/shashj/status/2008525294303355269
@alexbward
NEW: Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers that recent administration threats against Greenland didn’t signal an imminent invasion and that the goal is to buy the island from Denmark, according to people familiar with the discussions.
I took 5 months from my 17th birthday to pass my test.
Bottom three now 7 points adrift - 8 if you consider goal difference. Challenging.
I've got lots of sympathy for any Western leader trying to navigate their way round this. I've even got a bit (but only a bit) of sympathy for members of the US administration. Yes, it's obvious that they should call this out and/or leave. But anyone who has had a really sociopathic boss knows that, for all the right thing is obvious, it's never quite as easy as that.
Trump didn't invade Venezuala, he removed the obstacle that prevented a deal being done that would deliver billions for US companies. I don't think the Greenland deal will be different, the implied threat of military action will be used to remove the obstacles to a permanent US military presence and mineral/oil rights for US companies.
He is the deals president, everything is measured in short term billions for US companies and nothing more. He doesn't give a fuck about Greenland or the people who live there, it's all about getting Denmark to pay up for his protection racket and gaining rights to natural resources for US companies.
https://use-land-property-data.service.gov.uk/datasets/inspire/download
Works for me...