Marco Rubio's comments today need to be listened to, twice.
After the initial shock of Day 1 the Iranians still dont have a connected up effort such is the disruption to their commad & control and the personnel who should be running it. You see contrary statements and actions, especially around Iranian attacks on the GCC countries.
In addition the volume of attacks is a bit odd. Iran could launch hundreds of drones in a single wave to overwhelm defences but it appears to be in the low tens and the targeting seems scattered. That would suggest some issues, either that its hard to shoot and scoot or a lack of theater level control of operations
This might be further illustrated by the announcement of closure of the Straits of Hormuz. Effective so far with limited evidence of how they will enforce it but who actually announced it? It wasnt one of the big bosses, whoever they are today.
The targeting of those Gulf states has encouraged a lot of speculation about motive but I havent heard any talk around two possible & fairly obvious things. 1. Stretch the defensive screen by hitting widely , in terms of the geography and target profile and 2. This is essentially all tactics and no strategy with local commanders making calls.
There is obsession about a shortage of munitions, which is true to a point. the US & Israel are not really that short of offensive munitions and as they are sure of minimal risk, expect that to show. Bombs, including ones with guidance systems are not in short supply and are going to wreck Iranian facilities.
Given the decapitation, there's no very effective central government, surely ? I've seen some commentary than Iran did done preparation for that outcome, and regional commanders were given a certain amount of autonomy should it happen. It that correct ?
A quiet night in Dubai, although Abu Dhabi and Ras al Khaimah did have air raid alarms. No reports of injuries on the ground.
The airport is open, and there’s a handful of flights arriving and departing - including EK1 that just took off heading for Heathrow, as airlines try to clear the backlog. Looks like the outbounds are just for tourists who were supposed to have left at the weekend, in co-ordination with hotels and embassies. Scheduled flights are supposed to resume this afternoon, but that may again be postponed.
Two days ago, the Iranian regime had 11 ships in the Gulf of Oman, today they have ZERO. The Iranian regime has harassed and attacked international shipping in the Gulf of Oman for decades. Those days are over. Freedom of maritime navigation has underpinned American and global economic prosperity for more than 80 years. U.S. forces will continue to defend it.
Ships sailing freely through Hormuz now no Iranian navy?
Anyway, good to hear mission is accomplished. It will be as accomplished as last time.
Apparently the deaths of now four US service personnel were due to an Iranian missile attack on a base in Kuwait.
Also in Kuwait there were three F-15s inadvertently shot down yesterday morning, presumably some sort of communication failure between those operating the aircraft and those operating the air defences. Whoops. Thankfully crews all ejected and are safe.
BREAKING: Credible whistleblower discloses that FBI forensic experts were ordered to stand down from processing the scene where Renee Good was killed, because Kash Patel did not want Good referenced as a “victim” in the warrant.
It was treated as a crime scene by the Federal authorities where Good was treated as a perpetrator not a potential victim. But the agents who killed her got back in their vehicles and left the scene.
Marco Rubio's comments today need to be listened to, twice.
After the initial shock of Day 1 the Iranians still dont have a connected up effort such is the disruption to their commad & control and the personnel who should be running it. You see contrary statements and actions, especially around Iranian attacks on the GCC countries.
In addition the volume of attacks is a bit odd. Iran could launch hundreds of drones in a single wave to overwhelm defences but it appears to be in the low tens and the targeting seems scattered. That would suggest some issues, either that its hard to shoot and scoot or a lack of theater level control of operations
This might be further illustrated by the announcement of closure of the Straits of Hormuz. Effective so far with limited evidence of how they will enforce it but who actually announced it? It wasnt one of the big bosses, whoever they are today.
The targeting of those Gulf states has encouraged a lot of speculation about motive but I havent heard any talk around two possible & fairly obvious things. 1. Stretch the defensive screen by hitting widely , in terms of the geography and target profile and 2. This is essentially all tactics and no strategy with local commanders making calls.
There is obsession about a shortage of munitions, which is true to a point. the US & Israel are not really that short of offensive munitions and as they are sure of minimal risk, expect that to show. Bombs, including ones with guidance systems are not in short supply and are going to wreck Iranian facilities.
Given the decapitation, there's no very effective central government, surely ? I've seen some commentary than Iran did done preparation for that outcome, and regional commanders were given a certain amount of autonomy should it happen. It that correct ?
I have not read everything on PB.
One credible view is that it is a strategy to impose cost on Gulf States by undermining their "safe home for the business elite" image, and to gum up the international travel hub and business.
That then becomes a vector to get the Gulf States to apply pressure to the USA and to Trump.
The Gulf is very significant is the Tump family's obtaining billions through corrupt dealings, so it could be a private pressure point, too.
As you say, perhaps it is tactical only, or limitation of capabilities, or perhaps it is a light pressure first tactic.
Do Britons think the UK government should praise or condemn the US for the Iran attacks?
Should condemn: 21% Should praise: 12% Should neither condemn nor praise: 45%
The UK prefers to sit on the fence.
45% of all UK voters and 47% of Labour voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks on Iran, so Starmer by sitting on the fence is actually close to what a plurality of UK voters and voters of his own party want.
44% of Green voters, again a plurality, think the strikes should be condemned, so Polanski also in line for his voters.
39% of Reform voters think the UK should praise the US strikes, tied for a plurality with neither condemn nor praise, so Farage also about right in terms of what his voters want.
Davey a bit out of line though, he has opposed the US attacks but 44%, a plurality of his voters, neither condemn nor praise them and 30% condemn them.
Most out of line with her voters though is Kemi surprisingly, 60% of Conservative voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks ie SKS's position, Kemi's praising the US attacks is backed by only 20% of Tory voters, even if only 8% of Tories condemn the US attacks Kemi might want to tone down the hawklike bomb the regime to bits line
She said we should have supported the US in the same way and crucially the same time as Canada
Apart from that, now Starmer has agreed the use of British bases there is not much difference in their position
She was curiously vehement about it, then.
Let's be clear, this wasn't a NATO, or some coalition operation. There was no joint planning countries other than Israel before it started - we weren't even consulted. And now Hegseth has announced they aren't bound by any "stupid rules of engagement" - so screw Amy civilian casualties being a constraint, I guess.
And Badenoch says we should have just been a good little poodle ?
I'm not convinced.
Once again you deny what Kemi said and when.
We all heard what she said.
Some of her backbenchers clearly heard what she said and were disgusted.
You cannot put a spin on what she said other than it was venomous, ass licking, not becoming of a serious politician and further evidence that whatever the tooic she will argue for the same of an arguement, that is a mental health trait that makes her totally unfit for the Office of PM.
Marco Rubio's comments today need to be listened to, twice.
After the initial shock of Day 1 the Iranians still dont have a connected up effort such is the disruption to their commad & control and the personnel who should be running it. You see contrary statements and actions, especially around Iranian attacks on the GCC countries.
In addition the volume of attacks is a bit odd. Iran could launch hundreds of drones in a single wave to overwhelm defences but it appears to be in the low tens and the targeting seems scattered. That would suggest some issues, either that its hard to shoot and scoot or a lack of theater level control of operations
This might be further illustrated by the announcement of closure of the Straits of Hormuz. Effective so far with limited evidence of how they will enforce it but who actually announced it? It wasnt one of the big bosses, whoever they are today.
The targeting of those Gulf states has encouraged a lot of speculation about motive but I havent heard any talk around two possible & fairly obvious things. 1. Stretch the defensive screen by hitting widely , in terms of the geography and target profile and 2. This is essentially all tactics and no strategy with local commanders making calls.
There is obsession about a shortage of munitions, which is true to a point. the US & Israel are not really that short of offensive munitions and as they are sure of minimal risk, expect that to show. Bombs, including ones with guidance systems are not in short supply and are going to wreck Iranian facilities.
Given the decapitation, there's no very effective central government, surely ? I've seen some commentary than Iran did done preparation for that outcome, and regional commanders were given a certain amount of autonomy should it happen. It that correct ?
I have not read everything on PB.
One credible view is that it is a strategy to impose cost on Gulf States by undermining their "safe home for the business elite" image, and to gum up the international travel hub and business.
That then becomes a vector to get the Gulf States to apply pressure to the USA and to Trump.
The Gulf is very significant is the Tump family's obtaining billions through corrupt dealings, so it could be a private pressure point, too.
As you say, perhaps it is tactical only, or limitation of capabilities, or perhaps it is a light pressure first tactic.
Anyone thinking the Gulf States would do anything other than back the US and Israel to the hilt in this scenario, doesn’t know the Gulf region.
Iran’s going to be lucky to have a handful of AK-47s to call their military equipment by the end of this week, and if it takes a week of minor disruption to totally disarm what’s been the Middle East’s biggest problem for decades, then so be it.
Iran has about as much left of their air defences as Russia does around Novorossiysk, and the heavy bombers (B-1, B-52) are about to start obliterating military facilities.
Conservative US commentator Tucker Carlson has urged the US to "get [Benjamin Netanyahu] under control".
"Sorry, it's not antisemitism. This is a head of state whose decisions are getting Americans killed and affecting the history of the world and the fortunes, but also the future of the United States," Carlson said in his latest podcast on Tucker Carlson Network.
The former Fox News host added: "The United States has to say to the government of Israel, 'You are not in charge.' ...No administration has paid a higher price for going along than the current administration."
Carlson, a Trump ally, had lobbied against military action and even met with Trump at the White House several times to dissuade him from an attack, according to the New York Times.
Several US leaders, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, had defended Washington's actions as "pre-emptive" because they knew Israel was going to strike - though Israel's PM Netanyahu's remarks appeared to suggest otherwise.
"Donald Trump is the strongest leader in the world. He does what he thinks is right for America," Netanyahu told Fox News on Monday night.
Looks like the US administration doesn’t know what it’s doing or why it’s doing it.
Instinct based on events so far is this will not topple the Iranian regime and whoever eventually emerges is (a) likely to be even more hardline than the fat old weirdo they’ve just nixed and (b) whether he is more hardline or not, will be desperate to get nukes, by buying from Russia if necessary, as an insurance against any repeat performance.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
Conservative US commentator Tucker Carlson has urged the US to "get [Benjamin Netanyahu] under control".
"Sorry, it's not antisemitism. This is a head of state whose decisions are getting Americans killed and affecting the history of the world and the fortunes, but also the future of the United States," Carlson said in his latest podcast on Tucker Carlson Network.
The former Fox News host added: "The United States has to say to the government of Israel, 'You are not in charge.' ...No administration has paid a higher price for going along than the current administration."
Carlson, a Trump ally, had lobbied against military action and even met with Trump at the White House several times to dissuade him from an attack, according to the New York Times.
Several US leaders, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, had defended Washington's actions as "pre-emptive" because they knew Israel was going to strike - though Israel's PM Netanyahu's remarks appeared to suggest otherwise.
"Donald Trump is the strongest leader in the world. He does what he thinks is right for America," Netanyahu told Fox News on Monday night.
Looks like the US administration doesn’t know what it’s doing or why it’s doing it.
Instinct based on events so far is this will not topple the Iranian regime and whoever eventually emerges is (a) likely to be even more hardline than the fat old weirdo they’ve just nixed and (b) whether he is more hardline or not, will be desperate to get nukes, by buying from Russia if necessary, as an insurance against any repeat performance.
If Trump attends any World Cup games, no doubt he will think the chants of "Yer don't know what yer doin'" are aimed at the referee...
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
It did in the Iraq-Iran war. Admittedly Saddam attacked first.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
Toppling Iran has an added bonus of axing a Russian ally and supplier of Shahed drones though - win/win.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
Toppling Iran hurts Putin.
Can someone find a way to shrink our smilies down again please - these huge ones are unspeakably crass.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
Toppling Iran hurts Putin.
Well, Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz makes it trickier to get his oil to market. But the increase in the price will be welcome...
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
Toppling Iran hurts Putin.
Well, Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz makes it trickier to get his oil to market. But the increase in the price will be welcome...
In the short term maybe, but cutting off the supply of Shahed drones is a big blow against Putin and a big win for Ukraine.
Topple Iran and support Ukraine simultaneously. Bargain two for one.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
Toppling Iran hurts Putin.
Well, Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz makes it trickier to get his oil to market. But the increase in the price will be welcome...
Novorossiysk, russia, looks beautiful this time of year. Explosions really bring out the coastline.
Some detail on the Texas senate primaries early voting. Basically, about 200,000 more votes cast by Democrats than the Republicans. The last time that happened, dinosaurs roamed the Earth.
Fascinating that Rubio has said US has hit Iran only because Israel was going to do it first and they knew Iranian retaliation would hit Americans.
Talk about Israeli influence on US foreign policy!
I pointed out over the weekend that Israel seemed to have bumped the US into this.
It’s also clear that the end game planning has not been given / seconds thought so I expect this “war” to last years
Oddly Trump has also hinted at two Iranian attempts on his own life. This could be true - Iran would certainly have had a crack if it could, but it could also have been misreported to manipulate him into action.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
Toppling Iran hurts Putin.
Well, Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz makes it trickier to get his oil to market. But the increase in the price will be welcome...
Novorossiysk, russia, looks beautiful this time of year. Explosions really bring out the coastline.
Some detail on the Texas senate primaries early voting. Basically, about 200,000 more votes cast by Democrats than the Republicans. The last time that happened, dinosaurs roamed the Earth.
Fascinating that Rubio has said US has hit Iran only because Israel was going to do it first and they knew Iranian retaliation would hit Americans.
Talk about Israeli influence on US foreign policy!
I pointed out over the weekend that Israel seemed to have bumped the US into this.
It’s also clear that the end game planning has not been given / seconds thought so I expect this “war” to last years
Oddly Trump has also hinted at two Iranian attempts on his own life. This could be true - Iran would certainly have had a crack if it could, but it could also have been misreported to manipulate him into action.
If it’s true, I’m very glad they missed. I wouldn’t want anyone put int he position where they might find themselves approving of an action that involved the Iranian government.
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
If we can, and if its in our interests.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
Iran doesn't try to expand its borders.
Russia does.
Agreed, so if we could I would put them as number one target and Iran as number 2.
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
More importantly, it fails the "I don't want to hurt my friend Putin" test.
Toppling Iran hurts Putin.
Well, Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz makes it trickier to get his oil to market. But the increase in the price will be welcome...
If he can dig it out of the ground, of course. There remain supply pressures in Russia.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Not far to go before Greens take the lead, another one of @TSE's tips. Allowing for weaker Green support in Scotland and Wales they must be within a hair of first place in England.
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
Do Britons think the UK government should praise or condemn the US for the Iran attacks?
Should condemn: 21% Should praise: 12% Should neither condemn nor praise: 45%
The UK prefers to sit on the fence.
45% of all UK voters and 47% of Labour voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks on Iran, so Starmer by sitting on the fence is actually close to what a plurality of UK voters and voters of his own party want.
44% of Green voters, again a plurality, think the strikes should be condemned, so Polanski also in line for his voters.
39% of Reform voters think the UK should praise the US strikes, tied for a plurality with neither condemn nor praise, so Farage also about right in terms of what his voters want.
Davey a bit out of line though, he has opposed the US attacks but 44%, a plurality of his voters, neither condemn nor praise them and 30% condemn them.
Most out of line with her voters though is Kemi surprisingly, 60% of Conservative voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks ie SKS's position, Kemi's praising the US attacks is backed by only 20% of Tory voters, even if only 8% of Tories condemn the US attacks Kemi might want to tone down the hawklike bomb the regime to bits line
She said we should have supported the US in the same way and crucially the same time as Canada
Apart from that, now Starmer has agreed the use of British bases there is not much difference in their position
She was curiously vehement about it, then.
Let's be clear, this wasn't a NATO, or some coalition operation. There was no joint planning countries other than Israel before it started - we weren't even consulted. And now Hegseth has announced they aren't bound by any "stupid rules of engagement" - so screw Amy civilian casualties being a constraint, I guess.
And Badenoch says we should have just been a good little poodle ?
I'm not convinced.
Once again you deny what Kemi said and when.
We all heard what she said.
Some of her backbenchers clearly heard what she said and were disgusted.
You cannot put a spin on what she said other than it was venomous, ass licking, not becoming of a serious politician and further evidence that whatever the tooic she will argue for the same of an arguement, that is a mental health trait that makes her totally unfit for the Office of PM.
Flagged you for being boring.
You’ve now posted variants of the same point over 1,000 times
Do Britons think the UK government should praise or condemn the US for the Iran attacks?
Should condemn: 21% Should praise: 12% Should neither condemn nor praise: 45%
The UK prefers to sit on the fence.
45% of all UK voters and 47% of Labour voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks on Iran, so Starmer by sitting on the fence is actually close to what a plurality of UK voters and voters of his own party want.
44% of Green voters, again a plurality, think the strikes should be condemned, so Polanski also in line for his voters.
39% of Reform voters think the UK should praise the US strikes, tied for a plurality with neither condemn nor praise, so Farage also about right in terms of what his voters want.
Davey a bit out of line though, he has opposed the US attacks but 44%, a plurality of his voters, neither condemn nor praise them and 30% condemn them.
Most out of line with her voters though is Kemi surprisingly, 60% of Conservative voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks ie SKS's position, Kemi's praising the US attacks is backed by only 20% of Tory voters, even if only 8% of Tories condemn the US attacks Kemi might want to tone down the hawklike bomb the regime to bits line
She said we should have supported the US in the same way and crucially the same time as Canada
Apart from that, now Starmer has agreed the use of British bases there is not much difference in their position
She was curiously vehement about it, then.
Let's be clear, this wasn't a NATO, or some coalition operation. There was no joint planning countries other than Israel before it started - we weren't even consulted. And now Hegseth has announced they aren't bound by any "stupid rules of engagement" - so screw Amy civilian casualties being a constraint, I guess.
And Badenoch says we should have just been a good little poodle ?
I'm not convinced.
Once again you deny what Kemi said and when.
We all heard what she said.
Some of her backbenchers clearly heard what she said and were disgusted.
You cannot put a spin on what she said other than it was venomous, ass licking, not becoming of a serious politician and further evidence that whatever the tooic she will argue for the same of an arguement, that is a mental health trait that makes her totally unfit for the Office of PM.
Flagged you for being boring.
You’ve now posted variants of the same point over 1,000 times
Labour Together house account, working shifts from 5am until midnight seven days a week.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Not far to go before Greens take the lead, another one of @TSE's tips. Allowing for weaker Green support in Scotland and Wales they must be within a hair of first place in England.
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
When I looked at this at Xmas, the lowest combined Con/Ref score was 42% (YouGov on 6-7 July 2025), so the 39% here beats that by quite a bit. YouGov is clearly the best bet for this bet. Think it's very possible now.
Let’s hope now their policy positions come under scrutiny now rather than the main parties seeing them as frenemies or gormless simpletons they can simply control.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Not far to go before Greens take the lead, another one of @TSE's tips. Allowing for weaker Green support in Scotland and Wales they must be within a hair of first place in England.
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
These Yougov polls are verging on the silly now. Reform just achieved 28% in their 400th target seat. Surely Yougov aren't still predicting Labour swingback and Reform vote evaporation in their models against all the electoral evidence of this simply not happening.
Remember folks: there is no right answer for who to vote for. All the parties have it wrong in one way or another. I read the usual complaints about the Greens doing Bad Things to the economy. How does that make them any different to the Tories or Labour?
This country has stagnated to a stop. The only movement is debt repayment as everything else crumbles. That chart yesterday showing the state of the Royal Navy was all you need to see about how pathetic we now are.
Voting for the LabCon as "they're not as extreme as Reform/Greens" isn't enough. And it isn't true - in the last decade we have had both halves of the LabCon led by a lunatic.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Not far to go before Greens take the lead, another one of @TSE's tips. Allowing for weaker Green support in Scotland and Wales they must be within a hair of first place in England.
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
When I looked at this at Xmas, the lowest combined Con/Ref score was 42% (YouGov on 6-7 July 2025), so the 39% here beats that by quite a bit. YouGov is clearly the best bet for this bet. Think it's very possible now.
Evidence suggests that’s not a helpful way of looking at things, categorising a whole bunch of “f*** off all you politicians!” voters as falling into a right-wing ‘bloc’ based on nothing whatsoever?
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Oh dear.
In my view Starmer has just about got the balance right, but I am aware that I am much more hawkish than the general population. To most people Labour have been nauseatingly slavish to Trump and now have been yet again dragged into a massive Middle East conflict.
Wtf are the Lib Dems doing. This should be an open goal for them.
Yaxley-Lennon to Congress invited by one Congressman Randy Fine (who is a full on Trump nutter, except having moderately sensible views on vaccination afaics), and Joe Rittenhouse (an adviser to Marco Rubio).
That's fully in alignment with the Trump regime's national security strategy commitment to interfere in European politics to promote the extreme right.
Remember folks: there is no right answer for who to vote for. All the parties have it wrong in one way or another. I read the usual complaints about the Greens doing Bad Things to the economy. How does that make them any different to the Tories or Labour?
This country has stagnated to a stop. The only movement is debt repayment as everything else crumbles. That chart yesterday showing the state of the Royal Navy was all you need to see about how pathetic we now are.
Voting for the LabCon as "they're not as extreme as Reform/Greens" isn't enough. And it isn't true - in the last decade we have had both halves of the LabCon led by a lunatic.
Pointing out the Greens faults with their economic policies, as I did a few posts back hence your dig, is hardly an endorsement of Labour or the Tories or any other party when it comes to the economy. I’ve merrily criticised the both of them as have many others.
The Greens are second now, they should be subject to scrutiny, and quite frankly their belief in MMT and taking on the bond markets is nuts and, at least, the other parties aren’t that daft.
Or, now, when we criticise a party do we need to add a rider condemning other parties too ?
@Brixian59 the Jewish state is the only way Jews can guarantee a second holocaust wont happen. That safety net is also available to Zak Polanski, if he ever needed it.
If you think we don’t need it then you’re wrong. History teaches us that Jews are not safe, even in the West.
I 100% agree with you.
The.problem is that the current incumbent is hell bent on putting a target on the back of every Jew, every Synagogue on the planet.
He and his extreme politics, bloodlust, illegal occupations have made every Jew less safe than at any time since the Holocaust.
A more moderate more diplomatic globally aware Leadership that sought to defend rather than attack would make every Jew safer.
I think the majority in Israel know that and want regime change.
In an ideal world this would be nice. But, with respect, I am not sure you really get what it is like to live in a country surrounded by people who want to kill you and challenge your right even to exist. I don't have experience of this either but I think I am showing a little more empathy. Such stress leads a society to extremes. Its why the Israelis elect the people they do. They feel threatened and Netanyahu, corrupt monster that he is, plays to this.
October 6th lifted this to another level. Everything we are currently seeing in the Middle east, including the genocide in Gaza, flows from this. This is not a liberal democracy however much we would like it to be.
Where did October 7th ( which I assume you meant) flow from? Did it just pop up out of the blue?
No, it drove Israel to overreact in a way that has become frankly horrific. And it has driven the aggression against Iran as well. They have driven the US into this because for them, in their perception, this is a matter of life and death.
It is a matter of life and death. That is not an overreaction.
Time to eliminate the evil at source.
You seem very keen on the notion of eradication of bad guys with no thought for mass collateral casualties.
Now Donald Trump has today confirmed that Starmer is a very bad man. Should Donald Trump determine that retribution for Starmer's evil is required, how do you feel about being collateral damage?
Starmer is the bad guy, I've done nothing wrong, why should I be collateral damage for the guilt of a politician?
There are repressive regimes, often sponsoring violence in neighbouring countries, across the world: North Korea, Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, DRC and, of course, Russia. Should we be trying to eliminate all those bad guys as well? Should we be joining in with Pakistan on their attacks on Afghanistan, for example? I am curious where @BartholomewRoberts ‘ fervour for war will take us.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
LibDems closest to leading the polls ever?
The Alliance led the polls late in 1981.
Clegg led in 2010 and the LDs led briefly in the chaos of summer 2019
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Not far to go before Greens take the lead, another one of @TSE's tips. Allowing for weaker Green support in Scotland and Wales they must be within a hair of first place in England.
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
When I looked at this at Xmas, the lowest combined Con/Ref score was 42% (YouGov on 6-7 July 2025), so the 39% here beats that by quite a bit. YouGov is clearly the best bet for this bet. Think it's very possible now.
Evidence suggests that’s not a helpful way of looking at things, categorising a whole bunch of “f*** off all you politicians!” voters as falling into a right-wing ‘bloc’ based on nothing whatsoever?
Well, the Con+Ref share had been incredibly consistent for the last year. That has started to change...
Do Britons think the UK government should praise or condemn the US for the Iran attacks?
Should condemn: 21% Should praise: 12% Should neither condemn nor praise: 45%
The UK prefers to sit on the fence.
45% of all UK voters and 47% of Labour voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks on Iran, so Starmer by sitting on the fence is actually close to what a plurality of UK voters and voters of his own party want.
44% of Green voters, again a plurality, think the strikes should be condemned, so Polanski also in line for his voters.
39% of Reform voters think the UK should praise the US strikes, tied for a plurality with neither condemn nor praise, so Farage also about right in terms of what his voters want.
Davey a bit out of line though, he has opposed the US attacks but 44%, a plurality of his voters, neither condemn nor praise them and 30% condemn them.
Most out of line with her voters though is Kemi surprisingly, 60% of Conservative voters think the UK should neither condemn nor praise the attacks ie SKS's position, Kemi's praising the US attacks is backed by only 20% of Tory voters, even if only 8% of Tories condemn the US attacks Kemi might want to tone down the hawklike bomb the regime to bits line
She said we should have supported the US in the same way and crucially the same time as Canada
Apart from that, now Starmer has agreed the use of British bases there is not much difference in their position
She was curiously vehement about it, then.
Let's be clear, this wasn't a NATO, or some coalition operation. There was no joint planning countries other than Israel before it started - we weren't even consulted. And now Hegseth has announced they aren't bound by any "stupid rules of engagement" - so screw Amy civilian casualties being a constraint, I guess.
And Badenoch says we should have just been a good little poodle ?
I'm not convinced.
They'd change any rules of engagement at Mr Trump's whim, anyway.
Remember folks: there is no right answer for who to vote for. All the parties have it wrong in one way or another. I read the usual complaints about the Greens doing Bad Things to the economy. How does that make them any different to the Tories or Labour?
This country has stagnated to a stop. The only movement is debt repayment as everything else crumbles. That chart yesterday showing the state of the Royal Navy was all you need to see about how pathetic we now are.
Voting for the LabCon as "they're not as extreme as Reform/Greens" isn't enough. And it isn't true - in the last decade we have had both halves of the LabCon led by a lunatic.
Pointing out the Greens faults with their economic policies, as I did a few posts back hence your dig, is hardly an endorsement of Labour or the Tories or any other party when it comes to the economy. I’ve merrily criticised the both of them as have many others.
The Greens are second now, they should be subject to scrutiny, and quite frankly their belief in MMT and taking on the bond markets is nuts and, at least, the other parties aren’t that daft.
Or, now, when we criticise a party do we need to add a rider condemning other parties too ?
Wasn't having a dig at you or anyone individually. Our politics as a whole is throwing a collective fit at the rise of Reform and now the rise of the Greens.
I have little doubt that the political establishment would be quite happy for the challenger parties to recede and go back to the good old days of the duopoly. Its safe, predictable, easy to manipulate. And has slowly and now with increasing speed brought our country to its knees.
So we need to do *something* different, which is why I keep saying Liz Truss was right. Her analysis at least, even though her political skills were dreadful. So you're right that the Greens need scrutiny - as do Reform and yet no scrutiny has been forthcoming.
In any crisis you need that moment of clarity - we are in crisis, here is the issue, what can we do. The reason why we are in such a mess is that people keep denying the crisis. At least the populists recognise that, whether we agree with their policies or not.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Oh dear.
In my view Starmer has just about got the balance right, but I am aware that I am much more hawkish than the general population. To most people Labour have been nauseatingly slavish to Trump and now have been yet again dragged into a massive Middle East conflict.
Wtf are the Lib Dems doing. This should be an open goal for them.
I think that in fairness to the Lib Dems, 14% is a pretty good score for them outside of an election cycle (certainly post coalition). They always get ignored by the media and particularly when there are shiny new parties to obsess over. Their history also demonstrates that huge surges in poll ratings doesn't always translate into seats won.
It's good that the pollsters are so varied. Tells us that each poll should be treated with a lot of caution. But the trends hopefully tell us something about sentiment at the moment.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Too many lessons to learn in one go. But chief amongst them if this isn't a flash in the pan
1. Green becoming the leading party of the left is great news. Zack has done what Blair did and managed to tune into left leaning and centrist voters by having decent values.
2. Farage by accumulating all the detritus of the Tory party has given the flag wavers a niche home for racists on the right whose support can only go in one direction.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
There's more political acumen in a flea circus than in the British public.
2019 - Boris Johnson - "Yay - give him a big majority!"
2024 - Keir Starmer - "Yay - give him a huge majority!"
2025 - Nigel Farage - "Yay - give him the PM job!"
2026 - that Green plumber with the mountain of crazy hair "She'll do..."
Ladbrokes has scrapped its whole list of UK politics specials! I guess whoever got the job of funding the next staff Xmas party with far-fetched but sounding-halfway-possible eventualities for credulous punters to back, will soon be looking for new employment?!
Remember folks: there is no right answer for who to vote for. All the parties have it wrong in one way or another. I read the usual complaints about the Greens doing Bad Things to the economy. How does that make them any different to the Tories or Labour?
This country has stagnated to a stop. The only movement is debt repayment as everything else crumbles. That chart yesterday showing the state of the Royal Navy was all you need to see about how pathetic we now are.
Voting for the LabCon as "they're not as extreme as Reform/Greens" isn't enough. And it isn't true - in the last decade we have had both halves of the LabCon led by a lunatic.
Or, now, when we criticise a party do we need to add a rider condemning other parties too ?
I'm never going to post SKS fans please explain KB fans please explain NF fans please explain Ed Davey fans please explain
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
There's more political acumen in a flea circus than in the British public.
2019 - Boris Johnson - "Yay - give him a big majority!"
2024 - Keir Starmer - "Yay - give him a huge majority!"
2025 - Nigel Farage - "Yay - give him the PM job!"
2026 - that Green plumber with the mountain of crazy hair "She'll do..."
Relatedly more ability to deliver in a flea circus than in the British political classes.
If a decent chunk of those green voters actually understand what policies they are voting for, then the country is screwed. Reform would be bad, but reversible after they fell. The Greens? At that stage it would be everyone for themselves and try to hang in and survive it.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Too many lessons to learn in one go. But chief amongst them if this isn't a flash in the pan
1. Green becoming the leading party of the left is great news. Zack has done what Blair did and managed to tune into left leaning and centrist voters by having decent values.
2. Farage by accumulating all the detritus of the Tory party has given the flag wavers a niche home for racists on the right whose support can only go in one direction.
Only with Yougov, the new Freshwater has the Greens still 3% behind Labour and Reform 7% higher than Yougov has them and the Tories 3% higher
French-Greek force to defend Cyprus. Macron sending a frigate.and anti-drone systems, to back up the Greek F-16's and frigates. Interestimg development, although the French influence in the Mediterranean has been building for more than a decade now, via the EU-Med organisation.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Too many lessons to learn in one go. But chief amongst them if this isn't a flash in the pan
1. Green becoming the leading party of the left is great news. Zack has done what Blair did and managed to tune into left leaning and centrist voters by having decent values.
2. Farage by accumulating all the detritus of the Tory party has given the flag wavers a niche home for racists on the right whose support can only go in one direction.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Not far to go before Greens take the lead, another one of @TSE's tips. Allowing for weaker Green support in Scotland and Wales they must be within a hair of first place in England.
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
It will be well deserved. The voting public are not all bastards. What we have witnessed nationally and internationally over the last 2 years including supporting a genocide is beyond disgusting yet our government have gone along with it and our opposition parties have urged us to go further. Listen to vox pops speak among your friends and the only people not sickened are our leaders
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Too many lessons to learn in one go. But chief amongst them if this isn't a flash in the pan
1. Green becoming the leading party of the left is great news. Zack has done what Blair did and managed to tune into left leaning and centrist voters by having decent values.
The Greens are about to recruit Lord Mandelson, flog peerages for loans and invade a random Middle Eastern country?
Just when you thought British politics could get no more insane...
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
There's more political acumen in a flea circus than in the British public.
2019 - Boris Johnson - "Yay - give him a big majority!"
2024 - Keir Starmer - "Yay - give him a huge majority!"
2025 - Nigel Farage - "Yay - give him the PM job!"
2026 - that Green plumber with the mountain of crazy hair "She'll do..."
Relatedly more ability to deliver in a flea circus than in the British political classes.
When it comes to opinion polls, they're a lot less jumpy.
I have no doubt that a Green government would have a run from Mr. Market that would make Truss's descent look glacial in comparison.
What we really need is for a smaller unit to be run by the Greens, with full exposure of their policies. So we can look on in slack-jawed amazement at how bad it gets, how quickly.
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
Stats fans..... Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG Green - highest with anyone, ever Lab - lowest ever share with YG Con - joint lowest with YG since GE LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
There's more political acumen in a flea circus than in the British public.
2019 - Boris Johnson - "Yay - give him a big majority!"
2024 - Keir Starmer - "Yay - give him a huge majority!"
2025 - Nigel Farage - "Yay - give him the PM job!"
2026 - that Green plumber with the mountain of crazy hair "She'll do..."
We're not happy campers right now. Life is not quite as good as it was a couple of decades ago, and a fair bit worse than it would have been had easy economic growth continued.
So it's not surprising that we're all looking for a new face pointing to a way out, or a way back. It was the sentiment that underpinned 2016 as well.
Trouble is, that's the kind of mindset that leads to individuals and electorates making really bad decisions, putting a lot of trust in people who can promise the Earth because they haven't begun to think about the challenges in delivering it.
Blaming billionaires for the loss of the Good Old Days is probably preferable to blaming immigrants; punching up is always more wholesome than punching down. But it's still blaming a Them, so it's probably little more useful.
Comments
I've seen some commentary than Iran did done preparation for that outcome, and regional commanders were given a certain amount of autonomy should it happen. It that correct ?
A quiet night in Dubai, although Abu Dhabi and Ras al Khaimah did have air raid alarms. No reports of injuries on the ground.
The airport is open, and there’s a handful of flights arriving and departing - including EK1 that just took off heading for Heathrow, as airlines try to clear the backlog. Looks like the outbounds are just for tourists who were supposed to have left at the weekend, in co-ordination with hotels and embassies. Scheduled flights are supposed to resume this afternoon, but that may again be postponed.
Meanwhile, a bunch of sheikhs walking casually around The Dubai Mall last night with almost no security. https://x.com/sajwani/status/2028548441283117567
In the Tanker War - 1981-1988 ish - it was a number of years before that was set up.
https://x.com/nakuljosh/status/2028674403492573381
(Includes UAE, Saudi, Oman).
Apparently the deaths of now four US service personnel were due to an Iranian missile attack on a base in Kuwait.
Also in Kuwait there were three F-15s inadvertently shot down yesterday morning, presumably some sort of communication failure between those operating the aircraft and those operating the air defences. Whoops. Thankfully crews all ejected and are safe.
It was treated as a crime scene by the Federal authorities where Good was treated as a perpetrator not a potential victim. But the agents who killed her got back in their vehicles and left the scene.
One credible view is that it is a strategy to impose cost on Gulf States by undermining their "safe home for the business elite" image, and to gum up the international travel hub and business.
That then becomes a vector to get the Gulf States to apply pressure to the USA and to Trump.
The Gulf is very significant is the Tump family's obtaining billions through corrupt dealings, so it could be a private pressure point, too.
As you say, perhaps it is tactical only, or limitation of capabilities, or perhaps it is a light pressure first tactic.
We all heard what she said.
Some of her backbenchers clearly heard what she said and were disgusted.
You cannot put a spin on what she said other than it was venomous, ass licking, not becoming of a serious politician and further evidence that whatever the tooic she will argue for the same of an arguement, that is a mental health trait that makes her totally unfit for the Office of PM.
Iran’s going to be lucky to have a handful of AK-47s to call their military equipment by the end of this week, and if it takes a week of minor disruption to totally disarm what’s been the Middle East’s biggest problem for decades, then so be it.
Iran has about as much left of their air defences as Russia does around Novorossiysk, and the heavy bombers (B-1, B-52) are about to start obliterating military facilities.
"Sorry, it's not antisemitism. This is a head of state whose decisions are getting Americans killed and affecting the history of the world and the fortunes, but also the future of the United States," Carlson said in his latest podcast on Tucker Carlson Network.
The former Fox News host added: "The United States has to say to the government of Israel, 'You are not in charge.' ...No administration has paid a higher price for going along than the current administration."
Carlson, a Trump ally, had lobbied against military action and even met with Trump at the White House several times to dissuade him from an attack, according to the New York Times.
Several US leaders, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, had defended Washington's actions as "pre-emptive" because they knew Israel was going to strike - though Israel's PM Netanyahu's remarks appeared to suggest otherwise.
"Donald Trump is the strongest leader in the world. He does what he thinks is right for America," Netanyahu told Fox News on Monday night.
Instinct based on events so far is this will not topple the Iranian regime and whoever eventually emerges is (a) likely to be even more hardline than the fat old weirdo they’ve just nixed and (b) whether he is more hardline or not, will be desperate to get nukes, by buying from Russia if necessary, as an insurance against any repeat performance.
Few hit both targets sadly. Iran does.
No wonder he's worried.
Russia does.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpTrer76jTY
Sadly they fail the "if we can" test. Not the "if its in our interests" one, doing so would be both justified and in our interests, but its not practical. This is justified, in our interests and viable.
Toppling Iran has an added bonus of axing a Russian ally and supplier of Shahed drones though - win/win.
Topple Iran and support Ukraine simultaneously. Bargain two for one.
Talk about Israeli influence on US foreign policy!
https://x.com/thefl0orislava/status/2028569982594875811
It’s also clear that the end game planning has not been given / seconds thought so I expect this “war” to last years
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DYYndlMlZc
https://x.com/dailyirannews/status/2028472852668932548
Reform lead down to 2pts.
From the GREENS
On YouGov
https://x.com/steven_swinford/status/2028712635479319032?s=46
*Greens leapfrog Labour into second place*
RefUK 23% (-1)
GRN 21% (+4)
LAB 16%(-2)
CON 16%(-2)
LDEM 14%(nc),
Pollster note: This is the highest we've had the Greens, the first time we've had them in second. It is also the lowest we have had Labour.
SKS Fans you're boys toast
The May elections are going to be dismal for LabCon.
You’ve now posted variants of the same point over 1,000 times
The main parties squeezed either side
I’d vote Green locally. Never nationally.
Let’s hope now their policy positions come under scrutiny now rather than the main parties seeing them as frenemies or gormless simpletons they can simply control.
Not great for the wider economy as anyone who remembers the seventies will say.
Still in the seventies at least the Music and TV was good
This country has stagnated to a stop. The only movement is debt repayment as everything else crumbles. That chart yesterday showing the state of the Royal Navy was all you need to see about how pathetic we now are.
Voting for the LabCon as "they're not as extreme as Reform/Greens" isn't enough. And it isn't true - in the last decade we have had both halves of the LabCon led by a lunatic.
Reform - lowest with YG since LE 25 and 1 point above lowest since the GE with YG
Green - highest with anyone, ever
Lab - lowest ever share with YG
Con - joint lowest with YG since GE
LD - one above lowest with YG since GE
I think 9 points is the lowest 5 party spread ever
In my view Starmer has just about got the balance right, but I am aware that I am much more hawkish than the general population. To most people Labour have been nauseatingly slavish to Trump and now have been yet again dragged into a massive Middle East conflict.
Wtf are the Lib Dems doing. This should be an open goal for them.
Are they seriously this stupid in No 10 ?
Yaxley-Lennon to Congress invited by one Congressman Randy Fine (who is a full on Trump nutter, except having moderately sensible views on vaccination afaics), and Joe Rittenhouse (an adviser to Marco Rubio).
That's fully in alignment with the Trump regime's national security strategy commitment to interfere in European politics to promote the extreme right.
Ref 30 (=)
Con 18 (-4)
Lab 18 (+1)
Grn 15 (+1)
LD 13 (-1)
The Greens are second now, they should be subject to scrutiny, and quite frankly their belief in MMT and taking on the bond markets is nuts and, at least, the other parties aren’t that daft.
Or, now, when we criticise a party do we need to add a rider condemning other parties too ?
What a Yoigov poll for the Greens. Hannah Spencer is gold dust for them, it seems.
Interesting times, domestically too.
Good Growth and MiC have polls out over the next 24 hours too with FoN on Thursday (who are another high Green share pollster)
I have little doubt that the political establishment would be quite happy for the challenger parties to recede and go back to the good old days of the duopoly. Its safe, predictable, easy to manipulate. And has slowly and now with increasing speed brought our country to its knees.
So we need to do *something* different, which is why I keep saying Liz Truss was right. Her analysis at least, even though her political skills were dreadful. So you're right that the Greens need scrutiny - as do Reform and yet no scrutiny has been forthcoming.
In any crisis you need that moment of clarity - we are in crisis, here is the issue, what can we do. The reason why we are in such a mess is that people keep denying the crisis. At least the populists recognise that, whether we agree with their policies or not.
1. Green becoming the leading party of the left is great news. Zack has done what Blair did and managed to tune into left leaning and centrist voters by having decent values.
2. Farage by accumulating all the detritus of the Tory party has given the flag wavers a niche home for racists on the right whose support can only go in one direction.
2019 - Boris Johnson - "Yay - give him a big majority!"
2024 - Keir Starmer - "Yay - give him a huge majority!"
2025 - Nigel Farage - "Yay - give him the PM job!"
2026 - that Green plumber with the mountain of crazy hair "She'll do..."
SKS fans please explain
KB fans please explain
NF fans please explain
Ed Davey fans please explain
Oh shit I just have
Not a good look for Starmer/the UK.
Mind you, the Greeks need to be on their toes given maritime disputes with Turkey.
Just when you thought British politics could get no more insane...
What we really need is for a smaller unit to be run by the Greens, with full exposure of their policies. So we can look on in slack-jawed amazement at how bad it gets, how quickly.
Maybe the Isle of Man?
Or Frome.
So it's not surprising that we're all looking for a new face pointing to a way out, or a way back. It was the sentiment that underpinned 2016 as well.
Trouble is, that's the kind of mindset that leads to individuals and electorates making really bad decisions, putting a lot of trust in people who can promise the Earth because they haven't begun to think about the challenges in delivering it.
Blaming billionaires for the loss of the Good Old Days is probably preferable to blaming immigrants; punching up is always more wholesome than punching down. But it's still blaming a Them, so it's probably little more useful.