Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Starmer can only start from where he is. The die was cast a long time ago. Transatlanticism (often termed The Special Relationship' for the benefit of the more gullible) goes back a long way. Personally I thought Blair had a good chance to disentangle us from it somewhat but he preferred to row in with Bush rather than the EU and the UN at the time of Iraq and there has been no going back. Brexit didn't help but could be construed as no more than the burning of bridges that were already smouldering.
Carney is of course correct, and his way forward is plausible. I'm coming to see the Trump administration as a good thing in that it has encouraged us to fend for ourselves and build institutions with more reliable allies than the US. Even if and when there is a change in the Oval Office we shouldn't suppose the new incumbent is likely to be any more sympathetic to our concerns than Trump is. Ranchers in the mid-West and manual workers in the rust belt will always take precedence over friends across the pond. We need to accept that and learn to work with those with whom we have more in common.
I see this as an opportunity as much as a challenge.
Starmer ones again proves to be much better at politics than people give him credit for.
Starmer is OK to excellent at all aspects of politics except two, constructing a guiding philosophy and communication. The first weakness is not that unusual and shouldn't be fatal but the second should be. Still, I think he will survive this year and agree he is consistently underestimated.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.
Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.
Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.
Biden, without the senility, is what the Democrats need. Someone who gets middle America well enough to get a hearing. Who recognises the importance of manufacturing and investment there. Who is not obsessed with gender, race or equality. Who is focused like a laser on the economy and the standard of living of the average American. I am not persuaded Newsom is that man and AOC is not that woman. She would be a drag on the ticket where it matters even if she boosted the vote where it doesn't.
I would like to see Buttigieg on the ticket as VP but I think having him head it would be giving the Republicans a chance and after foisting Trump on the US and the world they don't deserve one.
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
Whoever does win the nomination needs to remember who are those who actually decide the election, because it’s not the States where you can weigh the blue vote. To say they need a balanced ticket would be something of an understatement.
Buttigieg is IMHO still too inexperienced, he’s not been a Senator or a Governor, and his stint as Transport under Biden was mixed at best with a number of infrastructure failures and accidents.
What’s really important is that they have lots of debates and let the primiries run their course, rather than the DNC Establishment trying to stitch things up early as they have done in the recent past. Pretty sure that 2008 was their last real primary season, they need to have much more policy discussion and debate as a party.
And 2008 gave them the appealing and winning Obama instead of the unattractive but establishment Clinton.
Clinton (H) still won the popular vote!
And until they do the sensible thing and pass an amendment to decide presidential elections directly on the popular vote, that doesn't mean a thing.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.
Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.
Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.
Biden, without the senility, is what the Democrats need. Someone who gets middle America well enough to get a hearing. Who recognises the importance of manufacturing and investment there. Who is not obsessed with gender, race or equality. Who is focused like a laser on the economy and the standard of living of the average American. I am not persuaded Newsom is that man and AOC is not that woman. She would be a drag on the ticket where it matters even if she boosted the vote where it doesn't.
I would like to see Buttigieg on the ticket as VP but I think having him head it would be giving the Republicans a chance and after foisting Trump on the US and the world they don't deserve one.
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
Whoever does win the nomination needs to remember who are those who actually decide the election, because it’s not the States where you can weigh the blue vote. To say they need a balanced ticket would be something of an understatement.
Buttigieg is IMHO still too inexperienced, he’s not been a Senator or a Governor, and his stint as Transport under Biden was mixed at best with a number of infrastructure failures and accidents.
What’s really important is that they have lots of debates and let the primiries run their course, rather than the DNC Establishment trying to stitch things up early as they have done in the recent past. Pretty sure that 2008 was their last real primary season, they need to have much more policy discussion and debate as a party.
And 2008 gave them the appealing and winning Obama instead of the unattractive but establishment Clinton.
Clinton (H) still won the popular vote!
And until they do the sensible thing and pass an amendment to decide presidential elections directly on the popular vote, that doesn't mean a thing.
True, but we're hardly in a position to lecture others about the shortcoming of their electoral systems.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.
Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.
Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.
Biden, without the senility, is what the Democrats need. Someone who gets middle America well enough to get a hearing. Who recognises the importance of manufacturing and investment there. Who is not obsessed with gender, race or equality. Who is focused like a laser on the economy and the standard of living of the average American. I am not persuaded Newsom is that man and AOC is not that woman. She would be a drag on the ticket where it matters even if she boosted the vote where it doesn't.
I would like to see Buttigieg on the ticket as VP but I think having him head it would be giving the Republicans a chance and after foisting Trump on the US and the world they don't deserve one.
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
Whoever does win the nomination needs to remember who are those who actually decide the election, because it’s not the States where you can weigh the blue vote. To say they need a balanced ticket would be something of an understatement.
Buttigieg is IMHO still too inexperienced, he’s not been a Senator or a Governor, and his stint as Transport under Biden was mixed at best with a number of infrastructure failures and accidents.
What’s really important is that they have lots of debates and let the primiries run their course, rather than the DNC Establishment trying to stitch things up early as they have done in the recent past. Pretty sure that 2008 was their last real primary season, they need to have much more policy discussion and debate as a party.
And 2008 gave them the appealing and winning Obama instead of the unattractive but establishment Clinton.
Yes indeed. Obama famously came from almost nowhere, and the DNC needs to allow the possibility of that happening again.
What happened in 2024 was unforgivable, 2020 and 2016 were total stitch ups with debate curtailed as much as possible to favour the Establisment candidate. The result was Donald Trump.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.
Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.
Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.
Biden, without the senility, is what the Democrats need. Someone who gets middle America well enough to get a hearing. Who recognises the importance of manufacturing and investment there. Who is not obsessed with gender, race or equality. Who is focused like a laser on the economy and the standard of living of the average American. I am not persuaded Newsom is that man and AOC is not that woman. She would be a drag on the ticket where it matters even if she boosted the vote where it doesn't.
I would like to see Buttigieg on the ticket as VP but I think having him head it would be giving the Republicans a chance and after foisting Trump on the US and the world they don't deserve one.
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
Whoever does win the nomination needs to remember who are those who actually decide the election, because it’s not the States where you can weigh the blue vote. To say they need a balanced ticket would be something of an understatement.
Buttigieg is IMHO still too inexperienced, he’s not been a Senator or a Governor, and his stint as Transport under Biden was mixed at best with a number of infrastructure failures and accidents.
What’s really important is that they have lots of debates and let the primiries run their course, rather than the DNC Establishment trying to stitch things up early as they have done in the recent past. Pretty sure that 2008 was their last real primary season, they need to have much more policy discussion and debate as a party.
And 2008 gave them the appealing and winning Obama instead of the unattractive but establishment Clinton.
Clinton (H) still won the popular vote!
And until they do the sensible thing and pass an amendment to decide presidential elections directly on the popular vote, that doesn't mean a thing.
As long as that popular vote is the vote of Donald Trump. People are amazed like you wouldn't believe how popular it is.
Starmer ones again proves to be much better at politics than people give him credit for.
Starmer is OK to excellent at all aspects of politics except two, constructing a guiding philosophy and communication. The first weakness is not that unusual and shouldn't be fatal but the second should be. Still, I think he will survive this year and agree he is consistently underestimated.
True.
He's a technocrat and administrator rather than a politician. Personally I don't mind that. It certainly beats the shit out of the likes of Johnson and Truss, not to mention the Great Orange Manchild. It has its limitations though, not the least of which is that it is difficult to win elections with someone like that at the helm.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
Which is where Mark Kelly has lots of appeal - he will go down very well with swing voters, I think.
If he doesn’t get the main gig, high probability of the VP role.
On follically-challenged Presidents, I didn't think Eisenhower had much hair on the top of his head but I don't think he was bald.
As much as trying to figure out what's likely to happen at our next General Election, trying to figure out who will even be running in the 2028 US Presidential election (I'm pretty sure there will be one) is also a challenge.
Presumably, Vance will throw his headgear of choice in the ring but could there be other Republican possibles less wedded to Trump? I'm trying to think of the last time a sitting President or Vice President lost the nomination (as distinct from the election) on either side and I'm struggling - I suppose it's possible had Bobby Kennedy lived, he'd have defeated Hubert Humphrey for the Democrat nomination in 1968.
The Democrat field is wide open and if the party does well in the midterms, it's likely to get even busier.
I recall some bright spark getting 250/1 about a Chicago Senator becoming President a couple of decades back. Whether such value exists in the form of Kelly I don't know - he certainly is a possible. Newsom seems to be the obvious place to start - I'm hearing contradictory views on whether he has transformed California or whether it remains a hellhole (presumably depending on your political viewpoint). California Governors have won before so it's not out of the question.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.
Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.
Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.
Biden, without the senility, is what the Democrats need. Someone who gets middle America well enough to get a hearing. Who recognises the importance of manufacturing and investment there. Who is not obsessed with gender, race or equality. Who is focused like a laser on the economy and the standard of living of the average American. I am not persuaded Newsom is that man and AOC is not that woman. She would be a drag on the ticket where it matters even if she boosted the vote where it doesn't.
I would like to see Buttigieg on the ticket as VP but I think having him head it would be giving the Republicans a chance and after foisting Trump on the US and the world they don't deserve one.
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
Whoever does win the nomination needs to remember who are those who actually decide the election, because it’s not the States where you can weigh the blue vote. To say they need a balanced ticket would be something of an understatement.
Buttigieg is IMHO still too inexperienced, he’s not been a Senator or a Governor, and his stint as Transport under Biden was mixed at best with a number of infrastructure failures and accidents.
What’s really important is that they have lots of debates and let the primiries run their course, rather than the DNC Establishment trying to stitch things up early as they have done in the recent past. Pretty sure that 2008 was their last real primary season, they need to have much more policy discussion and debate as a party.
And 2008 gave them the appealing and winning Obama instead of the unattractive but establishment Clinton.
Clinton (H) still won the popular vote!
And until they do the sensible thing and pass an amendment to decide presidential elections directly on the popular vote, that doesn't mean a thing.
True, but we're hardly in a position to lecture others about the shortcoming of their electoral systems.
It’s not going to take much for “Starmer cancels elections” to take hold among Trump supporters, they’re already paying a lot of attention to UK news.
At some point there’s going to have to be legislation tabled ahead of the locals.
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Not everyone agrees with Carney. Nige has slagged him off, big time: "a chap who gets everything wrong." Don't think people appreciate just how invested in MAGA Farage is.
Which is what made his equivocation over Venezuela so very revealing. It suggests that, in some way, he's almost as invested in Putin (or vice versa).
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Not everyone agrees with Carney. Nige has slagged him off, big time: "a chap who gets everything wrong." Don't think people appreciate just how invested in MAGA Farage is.
The politically literate certainly do but what proportion of the population is that?
Starmer ones again proves to be much better at politics than people give him credit for.
Starmer is OK to excellent at all aspects of politics except two, constructing a guiding philosophy and communication. The first weakness is not that unusual and shouldn't be fatal but the second should be. Still, I think he will survive this year and agree he is consistently underestimated.
True.
He's a technocrat and administrator rather than a politician. Personally I don't mind that. It certainly beats the shit out of the likes of Johnson and Truss, not to mention the Great Orange Manchild. It has its limitations though, not the least of which is that it is difficult to win elections with someone like that at the helm.
I don't see Starmer as a technocrat. There's more to being a technocrat than being dull.
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House? 2
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate? 0
Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election? 61
Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election? 36
UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only). Reform 14%
Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC? 21%
Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026? 9
The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026? Starmer
Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026? No
UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025). £146 billion
UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025). 1.2%
Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. Argentina
I don’t expect free and fair US elections. There is a non negligible chance of European teams boycotting the World Cup.
I think the risk of boycotts are much reduced after the TACO but there is certainly time for Trump to do something else as stupid. I am surprised you think the Democrats will make so little progress in the mid terms but presumably this is on the basis that the results will be fraudulent?
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House? 2
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate? 0
Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election? 61
Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election? 36
UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only). Reform 14%
Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC? 21%
Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026? 9
The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026? Starmer
Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026? No
UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025). £146 billion
UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025). 1.2%
Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. Argentina
I don’t expect free and fair US elections. There is a non negligible chance of European teams boycotting the World Cup.
I think the risk of boycotts are much reduced after the TACO but there is certainly time for Trump to do something else as stupid. I am surprised you think the Democrats will make so little progress in the mid terms but presumably this is on the basis that the results will be fraudulent?
The situation in Minneapolis with residents petrified to leave their homes, schools and businesses shut... it isn't difficult for one to imagine that occurring during the mid-term elections in November?
Starmer ones again proves to be much better at politics than people give him credit for.
Starmer is OK to excellent at all aspects of politics except two, constructing a guiding philosophy and communication. The first weakness is not that unusual and shouldn't be fatal but the second should be. Still, I think he will survive this year and agree he is consistently underestimated.
True.
He's a technocrat and administrator rather than a politician. Personally I don't mind that. It certainly beats the shit out of the likes of Johnson and Truss, not to mention the Great Orange Manchild. It has its limitations though, not the least of which is that it is difficult to win elections with someone like that at the helm.
I don't see Starmer as a technocrat. There's more to being a technocrat than being dull.
He’s an administrator. Not a technocrat. He fundamentally doesn’t want to change things, just change the settings on some dials on the board.
The biggest problem is that he is not a leader. The complaints about “why can’t I get things done?” are telling.
Starmer ones again proves to be much better at politics than people give him credit for.
Starmer is OK to excellent at all aspects of politics except two, constructing a guiding philosophy and communication. The first weakness is not that unusual and shouldn't be fatal but the second should be. Still, I think he will survive this year and agree he is consistently underestimated.
True.
He's a technocrat and administrator rather than a politician. Personally I don't mind that. It certainly beats the shit out of the likes of Johnson and Truss, not to mention the Great Orange Manchild. It has its limitations though, not the least of which is that it is difficult to win elections with someone like that at the helm.
I don't see Starmer as a technocrat. There's more to being a technocrat than being dull.
Daughter has worked with him. She certainly wouldn't argue with 'dull'. Maybe technocrat is not quite the right term.
How about Arsenal Supporter? That should put most people off.
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Pretty sure Mandelson will still be having his tuppenceworth, and Starmer (possible through the medium of McSweeney until Petie gets the full rehabilitation treatment) will be taking it. That tuppenceworth is very much 'best buds'.
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House? 2
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate? 0
Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election? 61
Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election? 36
UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only). Reform 14%
Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC? 21%
Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026? 9
The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026? Starmer
Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026? No
UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025). £146 billion
UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025). 1.2%
Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. Argentina
I don’t expect free and fair US elections. There is a non negligible chance of European teams boycotting the World Cup.
I think the risk of boycotts are much reduced after the TACO but there is certainly time for Trump to do something else as stupid. I am surprised you think the Democrats will make so little progress in the mid terms but presumably this is on the basis that the results will be fraudulent?
The situation in Minneapolis with residents petrified to leave their homes, schools and businesses shut... it isn't difficult for one to imagine that occurring during the mid-term elections in November?
Trump can't do that everyone, there are only so many people on ICE available and it seems to require a lot just to terrify Minneapolis..
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
Which is where Mark Kelly has lots of appeal - he will go down very well with swing voters, I think.
If he doesn’t get the main gig, high probability of the VP role.
Apparently he's very dull, so should get along well with Starmer.
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Starmer can only start from where he is. The die was cast a long time ago. Transatlanticism (often termed The Special Relationship' for the benefit of the more gullible) goes back a long way. Personally I thought Blair had a good chance to disentangle us from it somewhat but he preferred to row in with Bush rather than the EU and the UN at the time of Iraq and there has been no going back. Brexit didn't help but could be construed as no more than the burning of bridges that were already smouldering.
Carney is of course correct, and his way forward is plausible. I'm coming to see the Trump administration as a good thing in that it has encouraged us to fend for ourselves and build institutions with more reliable allies than the US. Even if and when there is a change in the Oval Office we shouldn't suppose the new incumbent is likely to be any more sympathetic to our concerns than Trump is. Ranchers in the mid-West and manual workers in the rust belt will always take precedence over friends across the pond. We need to accept that and learn to work with those with whom we have more in common.
I see this as an opportunity as much as a challenge.
The broader question for me is whether this is an aberration or whether it represents a semi-permanent shift in American focus and priorities.
It was widely predicted after 1989 America would turn more to the Pacific and the emerging commercial rivalry with China - that may be even more the case IF a California Governor becomes President. Yet NATO has endured and by 2029 you could argue it will have survived two 40 year periods - the Cold War and the Post Cold War.
Anglo-American relations haven't always been as we imagine - the Americans basically stopped us at Suez and Wilson wouldn't send British forces to Vietnam and you could probably argue it wasn't until Reagan-Thatcher that we had "the special relationship" once again. I agree if Blair had opted out of UK military involvement in Iraq, the facade of the relationship would have been different.
Indeed, I'd go further and say the norm of US-UK relations isn't as cosy or subservient as is often perceived. I think US-European relations have been much more interesting.
Starmer ones again proves to be much better at politics than people give him credit for.
Starmer is OK to excellent at all aspects of politics except two, constructing a guiding philosophy and communication. The first weakness is not that unusual and shouldn't be fatal but the second should be. Still, I think he will survive this year and agree he is consistently underestimated.
True.
He's a technocrat and administrator rather than a politician. Personally I don't mind that. It certainly beats the shit out of the likes of Johnson and Truss, not to mention the Great Orange Manchild. It has its limitations though, not the least of which is that it is difficult to win elections with someone like that at the helm.
I don't see Starmer as a technocrat. There's more to being a technocrat than being dull.
He’s an administrator. Not a technocrat. He fundamentally doesn’t want to change things, just change the settings on some dials on the board.
The biggest problem is that he is not a leader. The complaints about “why can’t I get things done?” are telling.
Yes, he very much isn't a leader, and he is very much too timid to risk changing anything too much.
It's not good enough for the times we find ourselves in.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
Which is where Mark Kelly has lots of appeal - he will go down very well with swing voters, I think.
If he doesn’t get the main gig, high probability of the VP role.
Apparently he's very dull, so should get along well with Starmer.
I'd be quite happy with a prolonged era of dullness, as long as it's combined with sanity.
“A dam was built, and the water no longer flows the way it should. When I think of Egypt, I think of the Nile — and I think of the Nile with water in it.”
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
As far as I understand it, the US engine of the economy runs on coastal liberals. California and New York alone account for over a fifth of US GDP.
Mostly driven by small numbers of massive tech and finance companies, while the direction of travel in the last decade has been away from NY and CA, in favour of FL and TX.
Apple and Google share prices going gangbusters is little to do with California as a place politically.
Most of the people working at Apple and Google are coastal liberals. They do not share many cultural values with blue collar workers in Alabama. The US economy depends more on the former than the latter. (But the electoral college downweights the voting power of New Yorkers and Californians.)
Most of the jobs are in the swing states and rust belt, and it’s people who vote not GDP.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday said individuals will soon be prosecuted for their role in what he called the “rigged 2020 election,” continuing his fixation on an election he lost.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump said “everybody now knows that” the 2020 presidential election was rigged and “people will soon be prosecuted for what they did.“
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Not everyone agrees with Carney. Nige has slagged him off, big time: "a chap who gets everything wrong." Don't think people appreciate just how invested in MAGA Farage is.
It's hardly surprising they don't see eye to eye. As governor of the BoE, Carney had to help deal with the Brexit mess, while Farage criticised all and sundry from the sidelines.
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Starmer can only start from where he is. The die was cast a long time ago. Transatlanticism (often termed The Special Relationship' for the benefit of the more gullible) goes back a long way. Personally I thought Blair had a good chance to disentangle us from it somewhat but he preferred to row in with Bush rather than the EU and the UN at the time of Iraq and there has been no going back. Brexit didn't help but could be construed as no more than the burning of bridges that were already smouldering.
Carney is of course correct, and his way forward is plausible. I'm coming to see the Trump administration as a good thing in that it has encouraged us to fend for ourselves and build institutions with more reliable allies than the US. Even if and when there is a change in the Oval Office we shouldn't suppose the new incumbent is likely to be any more sympathetic to our concerns than Trump is. Ranchers in the mid-West and manual workers in the rust belt will always take precedence over friends across the pond. We need to accept that and learn to work with those with whom we have more in common.
I see this as an opportunity as much as a challenge.
The broader question for me is whether this is an aberration or whether it represents a semi-permanent shift in American focus and priorities.
It was widely predicted after 1989 America would turn more to the Pacific and the emerging commercial rivalry with China - that may be even more the case IF a California Governor becomes President. Yet NATO has endured and by 2029 you could argue it will have survived two 40 year periods - the Cold War and the Post Cold War.
Anglo-American relations haven't always been as we imagine - the Americans basically stopped us at Suez and Wilson wouldn't send British forces to Vietnam and you could probably argue it wasn't until Reagan-Thatcher that we had "the special relationship" once again. I agree if Blair had opted out of UK military involvement in Iraq, the facade of the relationship would have been different.
Indeed, I'd go further and say the norm of US-UK relations isn't as cosy or subservient as is often perceived. I think US-European relations have been much more interesting.
Noted with thanks, Stodge.
Personally I foresee something of an uncoupling from the US. Or maybe I'm just hoping for it.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
What mistakes did Harris make - other than being who she is? As far as I could tell it was entirely conventional campaign based on the bread and butter stuff like cost of living.
The "culture war" stuff is blatant projection from the US right which too many people fall for. Even if you run a sober, sensible campaign, whatever candidate they pick will get an avalanche of "woke" histrionics regardless. They've already accused Kelly of sedition FFS, taking his pension away.
Conversely, there is a risk that if you don't energetically condemn stuff like ICE you have a collapse in Democrat turnout. I'm really not convinced a softly softly approach will work in this political environment - they need really a distinctive and pro-active USP. Can't just sit there taking punches.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday said individuals will soon be prosecuted for their role in what he called the “rigged 2020 election,” continuing his fixation on an election he lost.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump said “everybody now knows that” the 2020 presidential election was rigged and “people will soon be prosecuted for what they did.“
So why didn’t they rig 2024 ?
Can’t Trump just FOAD .
The world would party like never before !
Why didn't they? Because in their SHAME they realised they could not deny DJT any longer
@haynesdeborah Launching his "Board of Peace", Donald Trump claims that "threats to Europe, the US and the Middle East are really coming down".
But that is not what his European NATO allies and Canada are saying, in particular about Russia.
This was Air Chief Marshal Sir Rich Knighton, the UK defence chief, in December: "For three decades, many did not have to think about the Armed Forces. Peace was stable. Conflict was distant. But that is no longer true. I will argue that the situation is more dangerous than I have known during my career and the price of peace is rising."
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Not everyone agrees with Carney. Nige has slagged him off, big time: "a chap who gets everything wrong." Don't think people appreciate just how invested in MAGA Farage is.
I think people are realising it now, which is one reason why Farage is losing it atm.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday said individuals will soon be prosecuted for their role in what he called the “rigged 2020 election,” continuing his fixation on an election he lost.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump said “everybody now knows that” the 2020 presidential election was rigged and “people will soon be prosecuted for what they did.“
So why didn’t they rig 2024 ?
Can’t Trump just FOAD .
The world would party like never before !
Why didn't they? Because in their SHAME they realised they could not deny DJT any longer
The rhetoric is that the Republican victory was so large that they rigged the election and still lost.
“A dam was built, and the water no longer flows the way it should. When I think of Egypt, I think of the Nile — and I think of the Nile with water in it.”
A few years back, the Egyptian Cabinet "accidentally" leaked a meeting where they discussed bombing the dam. I think things have resolved somewhat since then.
It was always going to take about 15 years to fill the dam.
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Starmer can only start from where he is. The die was cast a long time ago. Transatlanticism (often termed The Special Relationship' for the benefit of the more gullible) goes back a long way. Personally I thought Blair had a good chance to disentangle us from it somewhat but he preferred to row in with Bush rather than the EU and the UN at the time of Iraq and there has been no going back. Brexit didn't help but could be construed as no more than the burning of bridges that were already smouldering.
Carney is of course correct, and his way forward is plausible. I'm coming to see the Trump administration as a good thing in that it has encouraged us to fend for ourselves and build institutions with more reliable allies than the US. Even if and when there is a change in the Oval Office we shouldn't suppose the new incumbent is likely to be any more sympathetic to our concerns than Trump is. Ranchers in the mid-West and manual workers in the rust belt will always take precedence over friends across the pond. We need to accept that and learn to work with those with whom we have more in common.
I see this as an opportunity as much as a challenge.
The broader question for me is whether this is an aberration or whether it represents a semi-permanent shift in American focus and priorities.
It was widely predicted after 1989 America would turn more to the Pacific and the emerging commercial rivalry with China - that may be even more the case IF a California Governor becomes President. Yet NATO has endured and by 2029 you could argue it will have survived two 40 year periods - the Cold War and the Post Cold War.
Anglo-American relations haven't always been as we imagine - the Americans basically stopped us at Suez and Wilson wouldn't send British forces to Vietnam and you could probably argue it wasn't until Reagan-Thatcher that we had "the special relationship" once again. I agree if Blair had opted out of UK military involvement in Iraq, the facade of the relationship would have been different.
Indeed, I'd go further and say the norm of US-UK relations isn't as cosy or subservient as is often perceived. I think US-European relations have been much more interesting.
One interesting thing from Davos was quite how rude Newsom was about European leaders. While he was making a valid point, the manner in which he made it was almost as dismissive as Trump's behaviour. I don't think he will have won many friends from his visit.
Just going back to Carney for a moment one of the key parts of the speech for me was this:
"But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what's offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It's the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination. In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice – compete with each other for favor, or to combine to create a third path with impact."
This was a direct and very clear critique of the Starmer "special deal" approach which got us the 5% off tariffs and has been the basis of our "handling" of the Trump grotesque until now. In contrast, the unified position of Europe and Canada has produced yet another Trump TACO on Greenland very quickly. It shows the way ahead. I very much hope that Starmer learns from this and evolves his strategy. I do not doubt for a moment that he was being advised by the Foreign Office that "best buds" was the way to go and that he pursued that believing that to be in the national interest, whatever his personal distaste. So long as the lesson is learned no great harm is done.
Not everyone agrees with Carney. Nige has slagged him off, big time: "a chap who gets everything wrong." Don't think people appreciate just how invested in MAGA Farage is.
I think people are realising it now, which is one reason why Farage is losing it atm.
There's a possible chance we have seen both peak Farage (in the last month) and peak Trump (in the last week).
President Donald Trump on Wednesday said individuals will soon be prosecuted for their role in what he called the “rigged 2020 election,” continuing his fixation on an election he lost.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump said “everybody now knows that” the 2020 presidential election was rigged and “people will soon be prosecuted for what they did.“
So why didn’t they rig 2024 ?
Can’t Trump just FOAD .
The world would party like never before !
Why didn't they? Because in their SHAME they realised they could not deny DJT any longer
I think you have that wrong. They did rig it, but Trump's vote was so large - the biggest thing you've ever seen - that they weren't able rig it sufficiently.
Yes a much younger Biden would have been a good choice, someone with a blue-collar sensibility who understands how the engine of the economy runs. Coastal liberals poll terribly in the swing states.
As far as I understand it, the US engine of the economy runs on coastal liberals. California and New York alone account for over a fifth of US GDP.
Mostly driven by small numbers of massive tech and finance companies, while the direction of travel in the last decade has been away from NY and CA, in favour of FL and TX.
Apple and Google share prices going gangbusters is little to do with California as a place politically.
Most of the people working at Apple and Google are coastal liberals. They do not share many cultural values with blue collar workers in Alabama. The US economy depends more on the former than the latter. (But the electoral college downweights the voting power of New Yorkers and Californians.)
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
What mistakes did Harris make - other than being who she is? As far as I could tell it was entirely conventional campaign based on the bread and butter stuff like cost of living.
The "culture war" stuff is blatant projection from the US right which too many people fall for. Even if you run a sober, sensible campaign, whatever candidate they pick will get an avalanche of "woke" histrionics regardless. They've already accused Kelly of sedition FFS, taking his pension away.
Conversely, there is a risk that if you don't energetically condemn stuff like ICE you have a collapse in Democrat turnout. I'm really not convinced a softly softly approach will work in this political environment - they need really a distinctive and pro-active USP. Can't just sit there taking punches.
She was too nice. Needed to embrace "the Chicgo way" with Trump - if he brings a knife, you bring a gun.
He was just spouting endless lies in that campaign.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
What mistakes did Harris make - other than being who she is? As far as I could tell it was entirely conventional campaign based on the bread and butter stuff like cost of living.
The "culture war" stuff is blatant projection from the US right which too many people fall for. Even if you run a sober, sensible campaign, whatever candidate they pick will get an avalanche of "woke" histrionics regardless. They've already accused Kelly of sedition FFS, taking his pension away.
Conversely, there is a risk that if you don't energetically condemn stuff like ICE you have a collapse in Democrat turnout. I'm really not convinced a softly softly approach will work in this political environment - they need really a distinctive and pro-active USP. Can't just sit there taking punches.
The mistake Harris arguably made was being too loyal to Biden, and not creating more distance from him sooner. But she was, as very VP is, in an impossible bind on that score.
She wasn't an outstanding candidate, but she certainly wasn't a terrible one, either.
I think Kemi needs to be very cautious about clashing with Starmer on foreign matters at the moment, particularly in an area where she can be portrayed as being on the side of Trumpism against the UK. The time is coming when the word for that is close to treason.
Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again
Newsom seems to be everywhere.
No doubt he is running.
Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.
Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair. Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65. AOC is second on 8.6.
The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases. AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.
Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.
There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.
What mistakes did Harris make - other than being who she is? As far as I could tell it was entirely conventional campaign based on the bread and butter stuff like cost of living.
The "culture war" stuff is blatant projection from the US right which too many people fall for. Even if you run a sober, sensible campaign, whatever candidate they pick will get an avalanche of "woke" histrionics regardless. They've already accused Kelly of sedition FFS, taking his pension away.
Conversely, there is a risk that if you don't energetically condemn stuff like ICE you have a collapse in Democrat turnout. I'm really not convinced a softly softly approach will work in this political environment - they need really a distinctive and pro-active USP. Can't just sit there taking punches.
She was too nice. Needed to embrace "the Chicgo way" with Trump - if he brings a knife, you bring a gun.
He was just spouting endless lies in that campaign.
Agree. Every time he's rude or makes something up just "Epstein" him.
Criminals, especially drug dealers, tend to have a few on the go at any one time, with a high turnover. Millions of people have a personal one and a work one.
I had two phones for several years - one for personal use, one for work. I now have a single phone with two SIMs - one UK SIM and one Irish SIM. I'm an Irish resident, but I guess I'm in Rupert Lowe's figure of 91m active UK phone subscriptions.
We (me, wife, three kids 16-11) are hoping to go from Manchester to Austria for a summer holiday. Would you: - overnight ferry from Hull to Rotterdam then drive with overnight stop in Germany (probably cheapest,can pack as much stuff as we want, but would take up two days travelling there and two days travelling back. If si, where would you stay? - fly then hire a car (surprisingly expenaive even with Easyjet but only two and a half hours to our destination from Munich) - train to Brussels then Brussels-Salzburg sleeper (I'd always wanted to travel that way but some reports are discouraging) - something else?
The sleeper tickets are insanely popular, given such limited supply, and probably sold out as soon as they went on sale, assuming the ones for your travel date already are. So you can probably discount that option.
I’d take the ferry and car option, and you should get an early start off the ferry. If you want to break the back of the driving on the first day, go stay in Tubingen - the hotel schloss at the top of the hill is a great place to stay, and the whole old town is laid out beneath you. Or, to balance the driving between the two days, you could look at Heidelberg, or one of the characterful small towns along the Rhine around Mannheim. If you are driving to Germany, make sure you have your emissions sticker sorted for the vehicle well ahead.
For a party of five, the costs of individual plane or train tickets probably make the car an economic option; the downside is obviously the travel time there and back, which you may or may not see as part of your holiday.
Plus, the chance of all five in a party sleeping well on a train is close to nil. Going to be at least one grump the next day.
A consideration will be how many compartments you need - on the old sleeper trains, which I used every year back in the day, you'd commonly find two-person or four-person cabins, so with five you'd be after at least two compartments. I always slept reasonably on a train - yes, you'd get woken up in the night by random noises or when the train stopped suddenly, but the movement of the train always sent me back to sleep quite quickly. The biggest hassle travelling in a small compartment with others is the lack of floor space, especially when the beds are all down, such that getting dressed or washed normally involved a complicated rotation-dance between beds and floor so that everyone got their turn.
Much simpler and relaxing doing it by car , no humping luggage for five, you can set your own schedule and the drive is a great part of the holiday, you do need the extra couple of days either side though.
It also depends on if they're counting tablets and dongles with 4/5G connections as a mobile phone sub or not.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
Alarm systems sometimes require phone connections via a dedicated SIM, too. Chip and pin machines, also.
There are lots of devices that have a SIM to send back data without a WiFi connection, but I'd have thought they wouldn't necessarily be counted as phone subscriptions.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think that would be a good source of an independent population estimate.
A lot of people have a separate sim for the tablet. And one for the watch.
So with a corporate phone, they would have 4 connections.
All lies. Lowe has proven that the real UK population is now 127m, of whom 50m are jihadis ready to slit our throats and impose sharia law and rape our women and refuse to be proper English by drunkenly fighting in the street.
We (me, wife, three kids 16-11) are hoping to go from Manchester to Austria for a summer holiday. Would you: - overnight ferry from Hull to Rotterdam then drive with overnight stop in Germany (probably cheapest,can pack as much stuff as we want, but would take up two days travelling there and two days travelling back. If si, where would you stay? - fly then hire a car (surprisingly expenaive even with Easyjet but only two and a half hours to our destination from Munich) - train to Brussels then Brussels-Salzburg sleeper (I'd always wanted to travel that way but some reports are discouraging) - something else?
The sleeper tickets are insanely popular, given such limited supply, and probably sold out as soon as they went on sale, assuming the ones for your travel date already are. So you can probably discount that option.
I’d take the ferry and car option, and you should get an early start off the ferry. If you want to break the back of the driving on the first day, go stay in Tubingen - the hotel schloss at the top of the hill is a great place to stay, and the whole old town is laid out beneath you. Or, to balance the driving between the two days, you could look at Heidelberg, or one of the characterful small towns along the Rhine around Mannheim. If you are driving to Germany, make sure you have your emissions sticker sorted for the vehicle well ahead.
For a party of five, the costs of individual plane or train tickets probably make the car an economic option; the downside is obviously the travel time there and back, which you may or may not see as part of your holiday.
Plus, the chance of all five in a party sleeping well on a train is close to nil. Going to be at least one grump the next day.
A consideration will be how many compartments you need - on the old sleeper trains, which I used every year back in the day, you'd commonly find two-person or four-person cabins, so with five you'd be after at least two compartments. I always slept reasonably on a train - yes, you'd get woken up in the night by random noises or when the train stopped suddenly, but the movement of the train always sent me back to sleep quite quickly. The biggest hassle travelling in a small compartment with others is the lack of floor space, especially when the beds are all down, such that getting dressed or washed normally involved a complicated rotation-dance between beds and floor so that everyone got their turn.
Much simpler and relaxing doing it by car , no humping luggage for five, you can set your own schedule and the drive is a great part of the holiday, you do need the extra couple of days either side though.
Before the pandemic, I did a few European trips by train with the dog, and it was a good way to go, convenient if you want to visit cities. The problem was the dog crap that filled up much of the suitcase leaving very little space for my stuff and leading to a fortnight spent frequently washing clothes. The car is, as you say, much easier, but you do need the time, and need to adjust the itinerary to reflect the increasingly restrictive rules on driving and parking in urban areas in much of Europe.
A lot of people have a separate sim for the tablet. And one for the watch.
So with a corporate phone, they would have 4 connections.
See, now I'm surprised that there are only 91m active phone subscriptions. I know you have to deduct off the young children, and the tech-resistant elderly, but it's not hard to see how the total could escalate very rapidly.
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House? 18 Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate? 5 Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election? 52 Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election? 40 UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only). Reform 14% Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC? 22% Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026? 10 The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026? Keir Starmer Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026? No UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025). £131bn UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025). 1.7% Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. Brazil
It also depends on if they're counting tablets and dongles with 4/5G connections as a mobile phone sub or not.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
Alarm systems sometimes require phone connections via a dedicated SIM, too. Chip and pin machines, also.
There are lots of devices that have a SIM to send back data without a WiFi connection, but I'd have thought they wouldn't necessarily be counted as phone subscriptions.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think they would be a good source of an independent estimate.
Both the sewage (water) companies and supermarkets seem to think the population estimates are a bit low.
It also depends on if they're counting tablets and dongles with 4/5G connections as a mobile phone sub or not.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
Alarm systems sometimes require phone connections via a dedicated SIM, too. Chip and pin machines, also.
There are lots of devices that have a SIM to send back data without a WiFi connection, but I'd have thought they wouldn't necessarily be counted as phone subscriptions.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think they would be a good source of an independent estimate.
Both the sewage (water) companies and supermarkets seem to think the population estimates are a bit low.
Those would certainly seem better ways of estimating population than counting phone sims.
It also depends on if they're counting tablets and dongles with 4/5G connections as a mobile phone sub or not.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
Alarm systems sometimes require phone connections via a dedicated SIM, too. Chip and pin machines, also.
There are lots of devices that have a SIM to send back data without a WiFi connection, but I'd have thought they wouldn't necessarily be counted as phone subscriptions.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think that would be a good source of an independent population estimate.
My insulin pump control unit (limited mobile phone model from one gen ago roughly) has a dedicated connection, with which it updates an internet portal.
My 2018 car also has something for location data and emergencies (including automatic contact).
Plus the Smart Meter.
And I'm not sure what else. Can you get one for the dog or the cat?
It also depends on if they're counting tablets and dongles with 4/5G connections as a mobile phone sub or not.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
Alarm systems sometimes require phone connections via a dedicated SIM, too. Chip and pin machines, also.
There are lots of devices that have a SIM to send back data without a WiFi connection, but I'd have thought they wouldn't necessarily be counted as phone subscriptions.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think they would be a good source of an independent estimate.
Both the sewage (water) companies and supermarkets seem to think the population estimates are a bit low.
I've always thought the supermarkets were simply underestimating food waste, but the other end of the process is harder to get wrong.
Good trading bet. I'd be quite surprised if he actually gets it.
Hes also bald. When was the last time the oscenely shallow Americans chose someone bald?
William will be our first bald King, and we won't be able to choose...
George V had quite a 'high forehead'! I always think William looks like the pictures of him I saw when I collected stamps.
I agree, the likeness is uncanny.
They are all from a very very small gene pool, so hardly surprising.
Catherine isn't from the monarchy gene pool. Philip was, of course. I think the Queen Mum was right on the edge of it.
The force is strong OKC , the odd brood mare being inserted does not change the looks of them. Put them in a line and you could not pick out who is who.
It also depends on if they're counting tablets and dongles with 4/5G connections as a mobile phone sub or not.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
Alarm systems sometimes require phone connections via a dedicated SIM, too. Chip and pin machines, also.
There are lots of devices that have a SIM to send back data without a WiFi connection, but I'd have thought they wouldn't necessarily be counted as phone subscriptions.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think that would be a good source of an independent population estimate.
My insulin pump control unit (limited mobile phone model from one gen ago roughly) has a dedicated connection, with which it updates an internet portal.
My 2018 car also has something for location data and emergencies (including automatic contact).
Plus the Smart Meter.
And I'm not sure what else. Can you get one for the dog or the cat?
Comments
Carney is of course correct, and his way forward is plausible. I'm coming to see the Trump administration as a good thing in that it has encouraged us to fend for ourselves and build institutions with more reliable allies than the US. Even if and when there is a change in the Oval Office we shouldn't suppose the new incumbent is likely to be any more sympathetic to our concerns than Trump is. Ranchers in the mid-West and manual workers in the rust belt will always take precedence over friends across the pond. We need to accept that and learn to work with those with whom we have more in common.
I see this as an opportunity as much as a challenge.
What happened in 2024 was unforgivable, 2020 and 2016 were total stitch ups with debate curtailed as much as possible to favour the Establisment candidate. The result was Donald Trump.
People are amazed like you wouldn't believe how popular it is.
He's a technocrat and administrator rather than a politician. Personally I don't mind that. It certainly beats the shit out of the likes of Johnson and Truss, not to mention the Great Orange Manchild. It has its limitations though, not the least of which is that it is difficult to win elections with someone like that at the helm.
If he doesn’t get the main gig, high probability of the VP role.
At some point there’s going to have to be legislation tabled ahead of the locals.
#COMPETITION
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House? 2
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate? 0
Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election? 61
Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election? 36
UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only). Reform 14%
Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC? 21%
Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026? 9
The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026? Starmer
Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026? No
UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025). £146 billion
UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025). 1.2%
Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. Argentina
I don’t expect free and fair US elections. There is a non negligible chance of European teams boycotting the World Cup.
It's not that he wouldn't be a good President, it's just that TSE will be insufferable if this one comes in.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/21/how-badenoch-meeting-with-mike-johnson-led-to-trump-chagos-deal-rant
FTFY
The situation in Minneapolis with residents petrified to leave their homes, schools and businesses shut... it isn't difficult for one to imagine that occurring during the mid-term elections in November?
The biggest problem is that he is not a leader. The complaints about “why can’t I get things done?” are telling.
How about Arsenal Supporter? That should put most people off.
That tuppenceworth is very much 'best buds'.
It was widely predicted after 1989 America would turn more to the Pacific and the emerging commercial rivalry with China - that may be even more the case IF a California Governor becomes President. Yet NATO has endured and by 2029 you could argue it will have survived two 40 year periods - the Cold War and the Post Cold War.
Anglo-American relations haven't always been as we imagine - the Americans basically stopped us at Suez and Wilson wouldn't send British forces to Vietnam and you could probably argue it wasn't until Reagan-Thatcher that we had "the special relationship" once again. I agree if Blair had opted out of UK military involvement in Iraq, the facade of the relationship would have been different.
Indeed, I'd go further and say the norm of US-UK relations isn't as cosy or subservient as is often perceived. I think US-European relations have been much more interesting.
Just wait until Ed Miliband replaces Starmer as PM/
It's not good enough for the times we find ourselves in.
crime syndicatepeace boardAnother lunatic rant
@adamjschwarz.bsky.social
Trump’s Board of Peace logo is basically the UN logo, except dipped in gold and edited so the world only includes America.
https://bsky.app/profile/adamjschwarz.bsky.social/post/3mcyxfipf3k2j
“A dam was built, and the water no longer flows the way it should. When I think of Egypt, I think of the Nile — and I think of the Nile with water in it.”
Can’t Trump just FOAD .
The world would party like never before !
As governor of the BoE, Carney had to help deal with the Brexit mess, while Farage criticised all and sundry from the sidelines.
Personally I foresee something of an uncoupling from the US. Or maybe I'm just hoping for it.
* So as not being be confused with any other UK PM called Tony Blair.
The "culture war" stuff is blatant projection from the US right which too many people fall for. Even if you run a sober, sensible campaign, whatever candidate they pick will get an avalanche of "woke" histrionics regardless. They've already accused Kelly of sedition FFS, taking his pension away.
Conversely, there is a risk that if you don't energetically condemn stuff like ICE you have a collapse in Democrat turnout. I'm really not convinced a softly softly approach will work in this political environment - they need really a distinctive and pro-active USP. Can't just sit there taking punches.
https://x.com/angelshalagina/status/2014276336919990626
Launching his "Board of Peace", Donald Trump claims that "threats to Europe, the US and the Middle East are really coming down".
But that is not what his European NATO allies and Canada are saying, in particular about Russia.
This was Air Chief Marshal Sir Rich Knighton, the UK defence chief, in December: "For three decades, many did not have to think about the Armed Forces. Peace was stable. Conflict was distant. But that is no longer true. I will argue that the situation is more dangerous than I have known during my career and the price of peace is rising."
“We will do it in conjunction with the UN.”
It was always going to take about 15 years to fill the dam.
While he was making a valid point, the manner in which he made it was almost as dismissive as Trump's behaviour. I don't think he will have won many friends from his visit.
They did rig it, but Trump's vote was so large - the biggest thing you've ever seen - that they weren't able rig it sufficiently.
In 2024 the ten most populous states split
Trump 7 with 151 EVs
Harris 3 with 101 EVs
Whereas those with 3 or 4 EVs split 7 each.
He was just spouting endless lies in that campaign.
But she was, as very VP is, in an impossible bind on that score.
She wasn't an outstanding candidate, but she certainly wasn't a terrible one, either.
Keep asking 'What would Carney say.'
Rupert Lowe has a figure of 91m active phone subscriptions, against a population figure of 69m people.
He think that’s indicative of the population being higher than the official stats, but I’m not sure. I always had a company mobile in the uk.
https://x.com/rupertlowe10/status/2014083705493483760
https://www.edrith.co.uk/p/staying-sane-on-social-media
All pretty good advice.
If you follow them, even the algorithmic timeline is fairly usable.
The CIA world Factbook has us slightly higher per capita than France (1.22 to 1.17) and significantly lower than Japan (1.78!).
There’s also people with cellular based internet and cellular enabled tablets and watches. I dunno whether these would show in those stats.
So with a corporate phone, they would have 4 connections.
Still, anyway, number of phone subscriptions is an exceptionally poor proxy for population numbers. If the water companies weren't discharging so much sewage into rivers and the sea, then you'd think that would be a good source of an independent population estimate.
The questions:
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House?
18
Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate?
5
Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election?
52
Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election?
40
UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only).
Reform 14%
Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC?
22%
Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026?
10
The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026?
Keir Starmer
Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026?
No
UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025).
£131bn
UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025).
1.7%
Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup.
Brazil
#competition
My 2018 car also has something for location data and emergencies (including automatic contact).
Plus the Smart Meter.
And I'm not sure what else. Can you get one for the dog or the cat?