• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2

In brighter news it would now be shocking if the next general election isn't a bloodbath for the Tories.
You'd hope.

Of course, whoever gets in won't really drive much change* anyway.

*probably a feasible first step being PR rather than first-past-post.
 
Two more Torie safe seats lost over night,
Concerningly, with Tamworth at least, it looks more like it's due to low turnover rather than Labour making huge gains (the number of votes conservatives lost is very close to the voter difference from the last GE)
Funnily enough if UKIP/whatever Farages new party is called hadn't run then their votes going to the Tories would've swung it
 
In brighter news it would now be shocking if the next general election isn't a bloodbath for the Tories.
Unfortunately I think this means they are going to delay the election as long as possible and do as much damage as the can before getting kicked out.
 
Two more Torie safe seats lost over night,
Concerningly, with Tamworth at least, it looks more like it's due to low turnover rather than Labour making huge gains (the number of votes conservatives lost is very close to the voter difference from the last GE)
Funnily enough if UKIP/whatever Farages new party is called hadn't run then their votes going to the Tories would've swung it


John Curtice says Labour's byelection performance equivalent to what was happening before its 1997 landslide victory

Last night, before the byelection results were declared, CCHQ issued a damage limitation briefing to journalists saying it was normal for governments to lose byelections. A party spokesperson said:

These were always going to be challenging by-elections and the rule of thumb is that governments don't win them. We have seen little to no enthusiasm for Sir Keir Starmer who voters can see stands for nothing and always puts short term political gain first.

But Prof Sir John Curtice, the leading elections expert, told the Today programme that these results could not be dismissed as standard byelection losses. He explained:

The truth is these were not ordinary government losses. The swing in Tamworth, at just below 24%, is the second biggest swing from Conservative to Labour in postwar electoral history. And at just over 20% the swing in Mid Bedfordshire is also in the top 10.

No government has previously lost to the principal opposition party a seat as safe as Tamworth. You have to go back to 1977 and the Ashfield byelection to find an equivalent.

If you want to look at the precedent – what's the last time that we had swings of this order? The answer is the parliament of 92 to 97. There were four byelection in that in which Labour got swings of over 20% from the Conservatives, and we all now how that ended.

And, by the way, those swings also occured in byelections in which the fall in turnout was often greater than it was in these two byelections.

So the point is we are not looking at ordinary byelection losses. We are looking at exceptional swings, and swings that for the only real precedent is not a very happy one for the Conservatives.

Curtice conceded that Starmer is not as popular as Tony Blair was ahead of the 1997 general election. But he pointed out that the 12 point rise in Labour's vote in the Mid Bedfordshire byelection matches the 12 point increase in Labour's vote in the national opinion polls. He went on:

You can argue maybe there isn't as much enthusiasm for Labour as there is discontent with the conservatives. But, nevertheless, when Labour have been challenged, they still managed to win that challenge.
 
Shocking results for the Tories. The GE should be an open goal for Starmer.

But by-election results are usually a protest against the government of the day not wholly reflected in a GE and there were very particular reasons why both outgoing MPs, and by extension their party, were very unpopular.
 

So what is Israel's endgame here? Go into Gaza - obliterate Hamas and then leave quietly and let them rebuild and carry on with a new PA in charge? This hasn't been thought through and based purely on emotion and hatred.
 
Last edited:

So what is Israel's endgame here? Go into Gaza - obliterate Hamas and then leave quietly and let them rebuild and carry on with a new PA in charge? This hasn't been thought through and based purely on emotion and hatred.
I was trying to work out the same for Hamas. A few articles now floating about on what they were trying to achieve and that they massively under estimated the response from Israel. Again the same logic applies the intial action was not thought out and based on purely emotion and hatred.
 
I was trying to work out the same for Hamas. A few articles now floating about on what they were trying to achieve and that they massively under estimated the response from Israel. Again the same logic applies the intial action was not thought out and based on purely emotion and hatred.
Fundamentally Hamas's endgame is the same as it has always been - the destruction of any semblance of Israel and Jewish people in the region, and ultimately worldwide too. Thier dying in the process is not a "loss" to them in the same sense as it would be for you or I - dying in the pursuit of that mission is a martyrs victory in itself, and an assured route to heaven.

The problem in analysing Hamas through the same lens as the "west" perceives the world is that they are playing with a wholly different set of rules. Their idea of martyrdom extends to the civilians they use as shields - it is their fundamentalist belief that they too will go straight to heaven.
 
I was trying to work out the same for Hamas. A few articles now floating about on what they were trying to achieve and that they massively under estimated the response from Israel. Again the same logic applies the intial action was not thought out and based on purely emotion and hatred.
A war with Israel and bring them into Gaza where the tunnels have been booby trapped? Bring some kind of reckoning? The current status quo not being acceptable?

But the big question for Israel is how do they know when they have wiped out Hamas? Only their infrastructure and their leadership?
Fundamentally Hamas's endgame is the same as it has always been - the destruction of any semblance of Israel and Jewish people in the region, and ultimately worldwide too.
Despite them wanting it doesn't mean that it is in anyway a realistic prospect given the differential in firepower between the two sides.
 
We need to hurry up and invent an atheist ray gun we can zap everyone with. It wouldn't solve everything but would at least go some way to sorting out this obsession Hamas have with death and martyrdom that @Not Mike Brown's Sock alluded to. Tbh, they're not interested in peace and if I was putting money on it their aim is to further strengthen that aim (of not seeking peace) and force Israel into committing war crimes
 
Compounds the absolute joke that are Student Unions honestly. So so weird
I've been on a student union. The issue is you only get people active in the idea of politics but usually the council president is a popularity contest who hasn't been active on the council at all.

But also having run other adult groups its no different to any other committee of voulnteers. Stupid **** gets done and you wonder why.
 
This is where Curtice and his ilk are invaluable. Looking at historical data and patterns to give a true reflection of what going on rather than simplification "oh the Tory voters didn;t bother turning up". Well yes on raw numbers that could be the correct answer is that backed up when we've seen similar results in the past, Nope.

All point to Tories are ******.

So question for Rishi does he wait to November giving him more time to regain seats he'd lose now but risk further slumping by not firing the gun earlier. Most analysts say Brown holding out was a huge contributing factor to his loss.
 
We need to hurry up and invent an atheist ray gun we can zap everyone with. It wouldn't solve everything but would at least go some way to sorting out this obsession Hamas have with death and martyrdom that @Not Mike Brown's Sock alluded to. Tbh, they're not interested in peace and if I was putting money on it their aim is to further strengthen that aim (of not seeking peace) and force Israel into committing war crimes

Israel don't need much forcing.

Reality is the leaders of Israel need Hamas more than anything, they need Hamas to keep Palestine split like it is. Last year during the Israel and Saudi talks the Israelis mocked Abbas the President of the state of Palestine as the "The Mayor of Ramallah" and due to that refused to acknowledge their dealings. As long as Hamas is a thing then Israel can keep denouncing it and keep taking more and more land in the west bank without issues and Israel have done nothing to help the Palestinian government during this.

Hamas needs Likud and Likud needs Hamas to thrive. Look at Netanyahu popularity before? It was embarrassing for him what happened but it's helped drive up support because War unites people more than anything else (Look at Thatcher before Falklands)

It's why the Israel right helped create and fund Hamas why? because it countered the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization. High up Israel officials at the time have admitted that they helped fund the extremists in Palestine to "split-divide" with the idea that they can bomb, besiege and blockade extremists with more ease.


I have also not seen any official stance from Hamas that seems to care about Judaism worldwide as is being alluded.
Short term it's been to liberate Palestine from Israel occupation. This is achievable especially if the Russia-Iranian circle start to get involved, with the Israel's PR machine started to shiver for the first time America I feel will eventually cave and try to work a middle ground.
Long term it's to take back land that TBF was wrongly taken from them by the British. Not at all realistic because Israel is America's doorway into the middle east and why they are making a big effort in the Saudi talks to counter the Iranian influence.


Also to point out the obvious I'm very much against Hamas but Israel have shown no desire for peace (Which is obvious given the occupation of the west bank) and have actively pushed away from it.

Also the vast majority of modern day religious extremist is politically driven by people who in reality care little about religion, if not religion they will find something else to create hate as a vessel. You go back to 1953 and the Iranian coup you will see that the UK and CIA basically started the whole "roots of middle eastern terror" (Using the exact same tactics Israel used) that had little to do with religion for America and Britain and all to do with the worry of the "monster" that is communism.
 
Last edited:
 
Israel don't need much forcing.

Reality is the leaders of Israel need Hamas more than anything, they need Hamas to keep Palestine split like it is. Last year during the Israel and Saudi talks the Israelis mocked Abbas the President of the state of Palestine as the "The Mayor of Ramallah" and due to that refused to acknowledge their dealings. As long as Hamas is a thing then Israel can keep denouncing it and keep taking more and more land in the west bank without issues and Israel have done nothing to help the Palestinian government during this.

Hamas needs Likud and Likud needs Hamas to thrive. Look at Netanyahu popularity before? It was embarrassing for him what happened but it's helped drive up support because War unites people more than anything else (Look at Thatcher before Falklands)

It's why the Israel right helped create and fund Hamas why? because it countered the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization. High up Israel officials at the time have admitted that they helped fund the extremists in Palestine to "split-divide" with the idea that they can bomb, besiege and blockade extremists with more ease.


I have also not seen any official stance from Hamas that seems to care about Judaism worldwide as is being alluded.
Short term it's been to liberate Palestine from Israel occupation. This is achievable especially if the Russia-Iranian circle start to get involved, with the Israel's PR machine started to shiver for the first time America I feel will eventually cave and try to work a middle ground.
Long term it's to take back land that TBF was wrongly taken from them by the British. Not at all realistic because Israel is America's doorway into the middle east and why they are making a big effort in the Saudi talks to counter the Iranian influence.


Also to point out the obvious I'm very much against Hamas but Israel have shown no desire for peace (Which is obvious given the occupation of the west bank) and have actively pushed away from it.

Also the vast majority of modern day religious extremist is politically driven by people who in reality care little about religion, if not religion they will find something else to create hate as a vessel. You go back to 1953 and the Iranian coup you will see that the UK and CIA basically started the whole "roots of middle eastern terror" (Using the exact same tactics Israel used) that had little to do with religion for America and Britain and all to do with the worry of the "monster" that is communism.
Oh yeah I agree, I don't think Israel, or at least the extreme right faction, have much desire for peace either and sadly this will give the extremists on the Israeli side a "we told you so" moment to justify their actions.

It's a **** show. I don't think most Palestinians support Hamas' actions and I think there's a sizeable amount of Israelis that wouldn't, for example, support a ground invasion of Gaza, but this is where they're at and I don't see it changing.

I think this is largely a geo political issue but religion is probably the main obstacle preventing a 2 state solution as the extremists on either side arent willing to entertain the idea of sitting down and coming to a solution.
 
And in the end the judge just fines him.
 
Top