Look, winning the World Cup cricket match v Scotland is much more important than winning the tinpot Calcutta Cup match, anyone who says otherwise is a loser.
Been doing a bit of 'how screwed are Labour?' Research on local by elections since May 2025. Labour are the only English main party not to hit 50% in a single election since then and have exceeded 40% only 7 times out of 208. In 18 of the 64 wards they defended they achieved less than 20% (more than they held). They have not gained a single ward, anywhere.
May has the capacity to be an astonishingly brutal night for them
Which they know hence the cancellation of many local elections in Labour held councils.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
I’m so pleased that Italy, like Argentina, have become a decent rugby team. They haven’t yet quite reached Argentina’s level, but they’re so far from their 6N whipping boys status of a decade ago
Can't argue with that.
Question is, how many were born in Italy?
More than the Italian Cricket team?
Just guessing.
I watched the Italian under 17s (I think) a few years ago. They were in some European competition and were playing at our local club's ground. IIRC, not a Luigi among them!
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
He's stated that he's in favour of rent control. In New York - the town where it was proved, to destruction, that rent control doesn't work.
Yes, rent control is a stupid policy. But he's also planning a big increase in house building spend.
It could all be a disaster, but his wilder plans have so far become rather more pragmatic in reality, so it will be interesting to watch.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
Rent Control might be the poster child for Populist Politics.
- Someone else will pay - That someone is someone else we don't like - There are claimed to be no downsides. - The policy won't work and will actually make things worse.
The first few are OK. But 5, 6 and 7 get overlong and over complex to no great purpose.
Just as her detective stuff (Galbraith) is OK but mostly too long. Like Dickens when she goes outside her good range she is a bit unreadable - of which the most egregious is, IIRC, The Ink Black Heart. This feels like the longest and dullest book ever written. The last time I looked - I may not be up to date - she had extended a 'will they won't they' romance to about 9,000 pages and still going.
Been doing a bit of 'how screwed are Labour?' Research on local by elections since May 2025. Labour are the only English main party not to hit 50% in a single election since then and have exceeded 40% only 7 times out of 208. In 18 of the 64 wards they defended they achieved less than 20% (more than they held). They have not gained a single ward, anywhere.
May has the capacity to be an astonishingly brutal night for them
May be you would be better to look at Government vote share in mid term year 2 and 3 over the past 25 years
All May will be is a sample in time.
It will have no bearing on the 2929 GE
Furthermore how screwed will the Tories be, off there worst GE result in 100 years, how much will they have increased vote share from that abysmal low point.
Labour are on target for a NEV of just over half Rishi's in 2024 and over 10 points lower than Major in 1995 and to lose 1500 councillors.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
Rent Control might be the poster child for Populist Politics.
- Someone else will pay - That someone is someone else we don't like - There are claimed to be no downsides. - The policy won't work and will actually make things worse.
In this case, though, as I understand it, the city will pay for new build subsidised housing for low income families.
The numbers might well fail to stack up, but it's not the rent control that you describe.
I suggest Andrew's two daughters would be well advised, for the moment at least, to concentrate on their families, their jobs and maybe their charity work rather than being their parent's daughters. In other words, live their own lives. So far as I have read the only contact they have had with Epstein and his 'mob' was at the behest of their mother who doesn't strike me as being a desirablerole model.
No, that isn't right. Keep them away from the public but they are still family.
Both Andrew and Sarah are deeply flawed, but they are Beatrice's and Eugenie's parents. Similarly Charles should not shun his brother nor William his uncle in private.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
He’s a bit more real world than quite a lot of the US right.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
Rent Control might be the poster child for Populist Politics.
- Someone else will pay - That someone is someone else we don't like - There are claimed to be no downsides. - The policy won't work and will actually make things worse.
In this case, though, as I understand it, the city will pay for subsidised housing for low income families.
The numbers might well fail to stack up, but it's not the rent control that you describe.
Subsidised housing works (for those in the subsidised housing) - because the policy is paid for.
The problem with rent control is that it is about imposing a cost and denying there is an issue.
He campaigned on rent control - will be interesting to see if that actually falls off the wagon.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
Figures on his personal popularity vs Reform are interesting, but despite efforts to expand they are more of a one man band than they might like, in terms of staying power.
I suppose the real test would be if he did a UKIP and left Reform to set up a new outfit, would the support for Reform hold up, or would it collapse to total irrelevance? Despite inclusion of some figures like Tice, Yusuf, and the former Tory backup dancers, I think they'd struggle (not least since that lot would all leave with Farage if it ever happened).
Obviously him going elsewhere looks unlikely, but I think it shows the reliance that is still there.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
That thinking falls down on the linear vs non-linear issue. Humans and their works are, generally, non-linear. Layers of chaos and order (see the Mandlebrot set).
Attempting to control a non-linear system with a linear rule set often end up with complete failure.
The first few are OK. But 5, 6 and 7 get overlong and over complex to no great purpose.
Just as her detective stuff (Galbraith) is OK but mostly too long. Like Dickens when she goes outside her good range she is a bit unreadable - of which the most egregious is, IIRC, The Ink Black Heart. This feels like the longest and dullest book ever written. The last time I looked - I may not be up to date - she had extended a 'will they won't they' romance to about 9,000 pages and still going.
I read the first Galbraith book and enjoyed it. Then tried the second and agree, went on too long.
Tremendously brave woman. There's a lot of darkness still going on in communities, especially against women, which seems to be both hidden from general view, but also shockingly common.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
Here you go:
"People respond to invectives.
The rest is filler."
You are now an economist.
Thank you, sensei.
You should put that up on your old youtube channel.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
Tremendously brave woman. There's a lot of darkness still going on in communities, especially against women, which seems to be both hidden from general view, but also shockingly common.
The case of the ex-Tory councillor going on at the moment shows that the Pelicot case is not as unique as we may like.
Khan seems to attract the same level of visceral contempt among some usually reserved for Starmer or Reeves.
One might argue it's because he's had the temerity to beat the Conservatives three times but this is London and while you could argue it was a Conservative city as recently as 1992 (and Boris won twice, albeit against a discredited Ken Livingstone), it is no longer.
It's probably not unreasonable to question the calibre of the losing Conservative candidates and Susan Hall won the primary last time, arguably against the odds, and also won the election before the ballot boxes were open and the results counted. Unfortunately, once the boxes were open, the democratic process told a different story.
Those who think Seb Coe or James Cleverley is the answer probably haven't worked out the question. The local elections will be fascinating inasmuch as they will likely show the political fragmentation of London between five political parties (six if you count the various Independents). The notion Khan could be re-elected on 30% of the vote isn't fanciful IF we retain FPTP for the 2028 contest. His position would be likely improved if the supplementary vote were re-introduced and especially if Reform finished second as I suspect the bulk of the LD and Green second preferences would go to him rather than to Laila Cunningham or to the Conservative hopeful.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
Been doing a bit of 'how screwed are Labour?' Research on local by elections since May 2025. Labour are the only English main party not to hit 50% in a single election since then and have exceeded 40% only 7 times out of 208. In 18 of the 64 wards they defended they achieved less than 20% (more than they held). They have not gained a single ward, anywhere.
May has the capacity to be an astonishingly brutal night for them
May be you would be better to look at Government vote share in mid term year 2 and 3 over the past 25 years
All May will be is a sample in time.
It will have no bearing on the 2929 GE
Furthermore how screwed will the Tories be, off there worst GE result in 100 years, how much will they have increased vote share from that abysmal low point.
Typical Blairite, using current data to forecast what will happen in nine hundred years time
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
There are many policies that are tried thousands upon thousands of times and never work… Tough sentencing. Trickle down. Cutting taxes to increase the tax take. Finding efficiency savings to plug whatever fiscal gap you want.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
Rent Control might be the poster child for Populist Politics.
- Someone else will pay - That someone is someone else we don't like - There are claimed to be no downsides. - The policy won't work and will actually make things worse.
Taxing unrealised capital gains “wealth” is giving it a good run for its money at the moment.
That will also never work, and drives the top taxpayers away. See California, and the Netherlands.
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
People are uninformed and/or irrational agents.
That's why economics is a load of old bollocks.
(It is also lots of graphs - I had to use a pencil and ruler in my exam.)
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
“ of just exactly forty five pounds!” This last he rapped out with a sidelong glance over his shoulder; and the next moment added, almost with a scream, “Scots!”
The odds on her being the Democrat candidate is 11.5 (9%) on Betfair. Second favourite behind Newsom.
I think the dream ticket for the Dems is Newsom with AOC as his VP. Newsom provides the look (white, male, tall, presidential) and a strategy that can widen the appeal beyond the core. AOC provides the fire and energy that will get out the core vote. Width and depth.
Dream ticket for Vance you mean! An arrogant rich California Democrat as their nominee with a far left woke Israel hater from New York as his running mate is guaranteed to turn middle America off.
Buttigieg or Shapiro or Beshear might worry Vance and the GOP, Newsom and AOC would not
Almost anyone could beat Vance, assuming fair election in 2028.
Perhaps if Trump's approval ratings continue to be in the toilet but Vance is clever and ruthless and grew up in poverty in Ohio, which was the ultimate swing state until 2020 and got himself to the 2nd most powerful job in the land by cunning and hard work.
Gavin Newsom's father meanwhile was attorney for Getty Oil and AOC's father was an architect and neither have shown any ability to connect with swing voters in the rustbelt, they have only been elected in safe Democrat states.
AOC has dropped her pronouns and has adopted Bernie Sanders priorities, in particular, cost of living.
A 2025 AtlasIntel poll found her to be one of only three major political leaders with a net positive image, with 46% of Americans viewing her positively compared to 44% negatively.
AOC recently toured Arizona and Nevada with Bernie Sanders, where they attracted record-breaking crowds (including 34,000 in Denver, Colorado).
A July 2025 poll of "Biden skippers"—voters in battleground states who sat out the 2024 election—found that 78% had a favorable view of Bernie Sanders, the highest of any Democratic-aligned figure.
I'm not suggesting her for President - too young, short, woman, brown - but as a VP complement to Newsom (tall, white, male, presidential). It's a ticket that reaches Bernie Sanders supporters. AOC is young enough to bide her time as VP for two terms if necessary.
It's a strong combination.
I think AOC would be a good VP candidate although she may choose to bide her time so that she can run either in 2032/2036 when she would be (I think) 45-50.
AOC + Newsom would be a disaster - reinforces the coastal state narrative
I think State of origen is a bit exagerrated in importance. How much did having Walz on the ticket help Harris in the Midwest?
Trump is New York to the core yet wins in Alabama, and does anyone realistically think Buttigeig could flip Indiana or Beshar flip Kentucky?
Comparing the two Trump wins:
Minnesota 2016 Clinton +1.52% 2024 Harris +4.24%
Michigan 2016 Trump +0.23% 2024 Trump +1.42%
Pennsylvania 2016 Trump +0.72% 2024 Trump +1.71%
Wisconsin 2016 Trump +0.77% 2024 Trump +0.86%
Compared with California
2016 Clinton +30.11% 2024 Harris +20.24%
Suggests that Walz did help in the rust belt states, especially his home Minnesota.
Certainly more than Harris did in either California or adjacent Nevada and Arizona.
I am not saying that there is no effect (though it does seem only significant in home state) just that it is only one consideration amongst many.
I am a big AOC fan but I think the Dems need a more centrist candidate in 2028.
The issue is more with Newsom and AOC both appealing to a core democrat audience. They need someone who can reach out to the Midwest
The problem with AOC is that she, like a lot of left wing Democrats, doesn't understand basic economics.
The solution to a housing crisis is more housing, not attempting to suppress prices (which results in less housing).
The "Abundance" Democrats get this. Newsom, while a slimy toad, also gets this.
AOC, Mamdami, Sanders and much of the Democrat left do not.
Is that true of Mamdani ? For a socialist, he seems relatively pragmatic - and is planning to finance quite a lot of home construction.
Not my politics, but he's more real world than quite a lot of the US left.
Sadly, yes.
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
The old joke is that not even economists understand economics, which hardly incentivises anyone else to learn about it as they think it is all just vibes and ideological theorising.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
People are uninformed and/or irrational agents.
That's why economics is a load of old bollocks.
(It is also lots of graphs - I had to use a pencil and ruler in my exam.)
Incentives, like invectives, don't need to be rational to be effective.
“I see what you mean now.” Nonchalantly avoiding an admission of failure and blaming it on you is something AI seems to have learned from processing politicians’ speech.
As I tend to write and speak in a detached, generalistic manner, I have a great fear I will be flagged as possible AI by many readers.
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
“I see what you mean now.” Nonchalantly avoiding an admission of failure and blaming it on you is something AI seems to have learned from processing politicians’ speech.
As I tend to write and speak in a detached, generalistic manner, I have a great fear I will be flagged as possible AI by many readers.
How will tell the difference between a Starmer response and ChatGPT?
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Is it true or false? Or is there a wider range of options than 'worked' and 'not worked'?
“I see what you mean now.” Nonchalantly avoiding an admission of failure and blaming it on you is something AI seems to have learned from processing politicians’ speech.
As I tend to write and speak in a detached, generalistic manner, I have a great fear I will be flagged as possible AI by many readers.
How will tell the difference between a Starmer response and ChatGPT?
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I think Reform are largely fart.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
“I see what you mean now.” Nonchalantly avoiding an admission of failure and blaming it on you is something AI seems to have learned from processing politicians’ speech.
As I tend to write and speak in a detached, generalistic manner, I have a great fear I will be flagged as possible AI by many readers.
How will tell the difference between a Starmer response and ChatGPT?
Charisma.
Well some people definitely can be tricked into believing ChatGPT is not a robot because of its fun nature*, Starmer on the other hand...
* they actually killed that with the latest iteration of the model.
Been doing a bit of 'how screwed are Labour?' Research on local by elections since May 2025. Labour are the only English main party not to hit 50% in a single election since then and have exceeded 40% only 7 times out of 208. In 18 of the 64 wards they defended they achieved less than 20% (more than they held). They have not gained a single ward, anywhere.
May has the capacity to be an astonishingly brutal night for them
May be you would be better to look at Government vote share in mid term year 2 and 3 over the past 25 years
All May will be is a sample in time.
It will have no bearing on the 2929 GE
Furthermore how screwed will the Tories be, off there worst GE result in 100 years, how much will they have increased vote share from that abysmal low point.
Typical Blairite, using current data to forecast what will happen in nine hundred years time
His worst crime? His posts are simply very boring.
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Prices are information.
If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever
Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I think Reform are largely fart.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
I don't think that's a Reform thing, I think it's a Tice thing. Tice has good business experience, is telegenic and has a good speaking voice, but always always comes over as a lightweight in interviews - less than the sum of his parts.
He wants to be Chancellor but I cannot see it happening. Might make a good Business Secretary though.
The Chinese got early access to Seed Dance 2.0 and were making action movies and anime. The west got it and its Hitler dancing with Michael Jackson and now this...
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Is it true or false? Or is there a wider range of options than 'worked' and 'not worked'?
False, I'd have thought. And yes to the second. But it's the phrase that stands out.
It's never "rent controls address symptoms not the cause" or "you can't fix prices in a free market without distorting supply and demand and making things worse".
It's always " ... have never worked wherever they've been tried".
I think someone once said it and it's one of those that took off and acquired a life of its own. Like commonly happens in sports punditry. Wealth taxes are another one. They've also (apparently) never worked wherever they've been tried.
Perhaps it's a spillover from the master sentiment that communism has never ... etc. Which is true of course.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I think Reform are largely fart.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
Reform need to say what they’d do. It’s fine being NOTA, like the Greens, but that only gets you part of the way.
Quite frankly the three main parties don’t deserve an audience after the crap of the last 25 years. Vote for the same old same old you’ll get the same old same old.
However Reform on the right and the greens on the left have done little to really earn votes yet.
Tice had an opportunity on that podcast to offer some vision. It was a waste of thirty minutes of the 25 years I’ve got left on this earth.
I picked the wrong week to holiday/visit Scotland.
Why would one ever do that in Feb....Or basically any month except Aug.
May is the best month in Scotland, unless you want to offer yourself as a sacrifice to the midges.
It also much drier than August
Unless you really want to go near Edinburgh during the festival
I actually didn't know that. Noted. I actually never suffered too badly with the midges, but I have bottles of the illegal in the EU insect repliant from the US. You see the midges running for the hills when they get a whiff of it.
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Is it true or false? Or is there a wider range of options than 'worked' and 'not worked'?
False, I'd have thought. And yes to the second. But it's the phrase that stands out.
It's never "rent controls address symptoms not the cause" or "you can't fix prices in a free market without distorting supply and demand and making things worse".
It's always " ... have never worked wherever they've been tried".
I think someone once said it and it's one of those that took off and acquired a life of its own. Like commonly happens in sports punditry. Wealth taxes are another one. They've also (apparently) never worked wherever they've been tried.
Perhaps it's a spillover from the master sentiment that communism has never ... etc. Which is true of course.
Why don't you find out? We have access to AI - ask it to find some successful examples of rent controls being introduced.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I think Reform are largely fart.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
Reform need to say what they’d do. It’s fine being NOTA, like the Greens, but that only gets you part of the way.
Quite frankly the three main parties don’t deserve an audience after the crap of the last 25 years. Vote for the same old same old you’ll get the same old same old.
However Reform on the right and the greens on the left have done little to really earn votes yet.
Tice had an opportunity on that podcast to offer some vision. It was a waste of thirty minutes of the 25 years I’ve got left on this earth.
Reform will just be a different same old same old.
The Greens might just be a "They did WHAT???? Jeeeeez....." before the bond markets and the IMF step in.
I picked the wrong week to holiday/visit Scotland.
Why would one ever do that in Feb....Or basically any month except Aug.
May is the best month in Scotland, unless you want to offer yourself as a sacrifice to the midges.
It also much drier than August
Unless you really want to go near Edinburgh during the festival
I actually didn't know that. Noted. I actually never suffered too badly with the midges, but I have bottles of the illegal in the EU insect repliant from the US. You see the midges running for the hills when they get a whiff of it.
Don't get it on anything plastic...
March - mid June is the driest period - the monsoon starts later in summer. Although driest is obviously relative.
I picked the wrong week to holiday/visit Scotland.
Why would one ever do that in Feb....Or basically any month except Aug.
May is the best month in Scotland, unless you want to offer yourself as a sacrifice to the midges.
It also much drier than August
Unless you really want to go near Edinburgh during the festival
I actually didn't know that. Noted. I actually never suffered too badly with the midges, but I have bottles of the illegal in the EU insect repliant from the US. You see the midges running for the hills when they get a whiff of it.
Don't get it on anything plastic...
March - mid June is the driest period - the monsoon starts later in summer. Although driest is obviously relative.
The way it feels on your skin, I am pretty sure its turns you radioactive!
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I think Reform are largely fart.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
Reform need to say what they’d do. It’s fine being NOTA, like the Greens, but that only gets you part of the way.
Quite frankly the three main parties don’t deserve an audience after the crap of the last 25 years. Vote for the same old same old you’ll get the same old same old.
However Reform on the right and the greens on the left have done little to really earn votes yet.
Tice had an opportunity on that podcast to offer some vision. It was a waste of thirty minutes of the 25 years I’ve got left on this earth.
Reform will just be a different same old same old.
The Greens might just be a "They did WHAT???? Jeeeeez....." before the bond markets and the IMF step in.
I don’t necessarily disagree. So where do the disaffected, and let down by the three main parties, go then ?
As the three main parties don’t give a fuck about these demographics.
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Prices are information.
If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever
Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
That is indeed a core economic truth that one is a fool to ignore. But it doesn't mean rent controls are always in practice a no-no. They are quite common across Europe, I believe?
I am not a rugby fan, but a long time ago in the early 1960's I was on police duty at Murrayfield for Scotland v England and as we had to watch the crowd I didn't see any of it
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Is it true or false? Or is there a wider range of options than 'worked' and 'not worked'?
False, I'd have thought. And yes to the second. But it's the phrase that stands out.
It's never "rent controls address symptoms not the cause" or "you can't fix prices in a free market without distorting supply and demand and making things worse".
It's always " ... have never worked wherever they've been tried".
I think someone once said it and it's one of those that took off and acquired a life of its own. Like commonly happens in sports punditry. Wealth taxes are another one. They've also (apparently) never worked wherever they've been tried.
Perhaps it's a spillover from the master sentiment that communism has never ... etc. Which is true of course.
Why don't you find out? We have access to AI - ask it to find some successful examples of rent controls being introduced.
I've just asked it who first said "rent controls have never worked whenever they've been tried".
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I do wonder how well Reform would do (or any equivalent) if Farage just left the stage.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
I always thought Tice was a reasonable performer. I listened to the Merryn Talks Money podcast this week where she interviewed him to try to glean some information on what they’d do in govt.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I think Reform are largely fart.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
Reform need to say what they’d do. It’s fine being NOTA, like the Greens, but that only gets you part of the way.
Quite frankly the three main parties don’t deserve an audience after the crap of the last 25 years. Vote for the same old same old you’ll get the same old same old.
However Reform on the right and the greens on the left have done little to really earn votes yet.
Tice had an opportunity on that podcast to offer some vision. It was a waste of thirty minutes of the 25 years I’ve got left on this earth.
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Is it true or false? Or is there a wider range of options than 'worked' and 'not worked'?
False, I'd have thought. And yes to the second. But it's the phrase that stands out.
It's never "rent controls address symptoms not the cause" or "you can't fix prices in a free market without distorting supply and demand and making things worse".
It's always " ... have never worked wherever they've been tried".
I think someone once said it and it's one of those that took off and acquired a life of its own. Like commonly happens in sports punditry. Wealth taxes are another one. They've also (apparently) never worked wherever they've been tried.
Perhaps it's a spillover from the master sentiment that communism has never ... etc. Which is true of course.
Why don't you find out? We have access to AI - ask it to find some successful examples of rent controls being introduced.
I've just asked it who first said "rent controls have never worked whenever they've been tried".
No joy.
OK, why don't you ask it the question I proposed? AI doesn't have a right-wing bias, it may not provide a flawless summary but it'll provide a decent beginning for your research. I don't understand why you're so determined to remain ignorant.
I think "rent controls have never worked whenever and wherever they've been tried" has just become a thing that gets said whenever and wherever rent controls are mooted.
Prices are information.
If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever
Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
Depends if the demand is natural or speculative, right? Perfectly possible for the capital rich to claim most the supply with no intention of using it.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9q5l22ryy4o
I find it staggering that a policy that has been tried thousands upon thousands of times, and yet has worked exactly... never... keeps being trotted out.
Jon Stewart, for what it's worth, also seems infected with the same fundamental disease: https://open.substack.com/pub/theargument/p/jon-stewart-has-become-his-own-worst
IIRC, not a Luigi among them!
FWIW - I do expect Scotland to absolutely rinse England this weekend.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/5451080/#Comment_5451080
But he's also planning a big increase in house building spend.
It could all be a disaster, but his wilder plans have so far become rather more pragmatic in reality, so it will be interesting to watch.
- Someone else will pay
- That someone is someone else we don't like
- There are claimed to be no downsides.
- The policy won't work and will actually make things worse.
I'm not sure there's anyone else who can do what he can.
Just as her detective stuff (Galbraith) is OK but mostly too long. Like Dickens when she goes outside her good range she is a bit unreadable - of which the most egregious is, IIRC, The Ink Black Heart. This feels like the longest and dullest book ever written. The last time I looked - I may not be up to date - she had extended a 'will they won't they' romance to about 9,000 pages and still going.
The numbers might well fail to stack up, but it's not the rent control that you describe.
Both Andrew and Sarah are deeply flawed, but they are Beatrice's and Eugenie's parents. Similarly Charles should not shun his brother nor William his uncle in private.
A low bar I concede.
Total waste of time. He talked a lot and said nothing.
I don't understand economics and so don't think I could ever justifiably seem to help run even a local council, but it is qutie notable how economic ideas from politicians very often end up with 'It sounds like it might work/it has the right motivation' as a primary justiication. Or appear to be based on an assumption that economic factors can be perfectly controlled by political decisions, adding x here or regulating y there, with near-immediate and direct correlation, which can also be swiftly reversed if you wanted.
IDK, that seems implausible to me, but hey, I'm not an economist.
The problem with rent control is that it is about imposing a cost and denying there is an issue.
He campaigned on rent control - will be interesting to see if that actually falls off the wagon.
I suppose the real test would be if he did a UKIP and left Reform to set up a new outfit, would the support for Reform hold up, or would it collapse to total irrelevance? Despite inclusion of some figures like Tice, Yusuf, and the former Tory backup dancers, I think they'd struggle (not least since that lot would all leave with Farage if it ever happened).
Obviously him going elsewhere looks unlikely, but I think it shows the reliance that is still there.
Attempting to control a non-linear system with a linear rule set often end up with complete failure.
It's therefore no surprise they get darker.
"People respond to invectives.
The rest is filler."
You are now an economist.
You should put that up on your old youtube channel.
Khan seems to attract the same level of visceral contempt among some usually reserved for Starmer or Reeves.
One might argue it's because he's had the temerity to beat the Conservatives three times but this is London and while you could argue it was a Conservative city as recently as 1992 (and Boris won twice, albeit against a discredited Ken Livingstone), it is no longer.
It's probably not unreasonable to question the calibre of the losing Conservative candidates and Susan Hall won the primary last time, arguably against the odds, and also won the election before the ballot boxes were open and the results counted. Unfortunately, once the boxes were open, the democratic process told a different story.
Those who think Seb Coe or James Cleverley is the answer probably haven't worked out the question. The local elections will be fascinating inasmuch as they will likely show the political fragmentation of London between five political parties (six if you count the various Independents). The notion Khan could be re-elected on 30% of the vote isn't fanciful IF we retain FPTP for the 2028 contest. His position would be likely improved if the supplementary vote were re-introduced and especially if Reform finished second as I suspect the bulk of the LD and Green second preferences would go to him rather than to Laila Cunningham or to the Conservative hopeful.
For instance, this is The Bodygard from 1992 featuring Whitney Houston and Kevin Costner.
Critics 38%
Public 64%
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_bodyguard_1992
People respond to incentives!
That will also never work, and drives the top taxpayers away. See California, and the Netherlands.
That's why economics is a load of old bollocks.
(It is also lots of graphs - I had to use a pencil and ruler in my exam.)
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_lPr9hLr8adIlTbYvk3_YUQ-JyiPiwevyc
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bsl46vGpMNU
In the comments people try other AIs.
"if a plane crashes on the ukraine/republic of china border, where do we bury the survivors"
output:
"You do not bury survivors.
"Survivors are rescued, treated, and sent home. Furthermore, Ukraine does not share a border with the Republic of China (Taiwan)."
“I see what you mean now.” Nonchalantly avoiding an admission of failure and blaming it on you is something AI seems to have learned from processing politicians’ speech.
As I tend to write and speak in a detached, generalistic manner, I have a great fear I will be flagged as possible AI by many readers.
A Government that got a grip of immigration and delivered economic growth, and they'd easily fall down to 15% again.
* they actually killed that with the latest iteration of the model.
Three stick insects on their chest
If prices are rising, it is telling you there is a shortage of something. Those rising prices create an incentive for people to produce more of said thing: say food or houses or whatever
Listen to the prices, don't try and drown them out.
He wants to be Chancellor but I cannot see it happening. Might make a good Business Secretary though.
https://x.com/charliebcurran/status/2022463429823598999?s=20
It's never "rent controls address symptoms not the cause" or "you can't fix prices in a free market without distorting supply and demand and making things worse".
It's always " ... have never worked wherever they've been tried".
I think someone once said it and it's one of those that took off and acquired a life of its own. Like commonly happens in sports punditry. Wealth taxes are another one. They've also (apparently) never worked wherever they've been tried.
Perhaps it's a spillover from the master sentiment that communism has never ... etc. Which is true of course.
It also much drier than August
Unless you really want to go near Edinburgh during the festival
Quite frankly the three main parties don’t deserve an audience after the crap of the last 25 years. Vote for the same old same old you’ll get the same old same old.
However Reform on the right and the greens on the left have done little to really earn votes yet.
Tice had an opportunity on that podcast to offer some vision. It was a waste of thirty minutes of the 25 years I’ve got left on this earth.
https://x.com/sixnationsrugby/status/2022735126568780216?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
The Greens might just be a "They did WHAT???? Jeeeeez....." before the bond markets and the IMF step in.
March - mid June is the driest period - the monsoon starts later in summer. Although driest is obviously relative.
As the three main parties don’t give a fuck about these demographics.
Congrats
Your prize is a Hawaiian pizza while listenting to ‘Creep’ on a loop
The try at the end flattered England.
Enjoyed the Ireland Italy more.
This wasn't a contest really.
All we need now is a Wales win tomorrow and it's all square again.
No joy.
Didn’t see the Ireland Italy game as I was out in Durham. Whether it was better or not doesn’t mean this was a bad game.
Still PB wouldn’t be PB if it didn’t have people being contrary for the sake of it.