"Why, after his first disastrous showing, did 77million apparently sane and literate people vote to give him a second bite at the cherry? I haven’t spoken to any of them but we’ll see what they say of themselves."
Do you question their sanity? (Are they evangelicals?). ( I guess there’s an underlying association suggested here, between insanity and evangelism, true?)
They're free to chose. As for Britain, the guy wasn't elected, no vote from the people. I mean Burnham.
No, I definitely don't question their sanity, that's what makes it so difficult to understand. They're sane and yet they voted for the person who openly promised to act against their best interests. Farmers are the prime example. The only answer I can see is that he appealed to a baser, more primitive drive, to be "great again" without specifying what that meant.
As for other politicians, we are surely cursed with the most awful bunch of deadbeats, no-hopers and corrupt paedophiles since Adam was a pup. They're unspeakable although with Lula's win, it could have been worse. As far as I can see, Xi is the only politician doing a proper job. I think he's a very tough character but he seems to be doing his best to clean up the corruption. It seems most Chinese are content with their government, which definitely isn't true in the West.
Everybody hates Putin but should they? His first action was to get rid of the Yeltsin clan, three cheers, then he turned on the oligarchs and pulled them into line. Russia turned away from becoming a failed state like Libya or Syria or Somalia and their standard of living is as high as Western Europe. Yes, somewhat repressive but hardly worse than say UK at present. Is he a demon in Netanyahu's class? I would say not. Corrupt as Kushner? Probably not. As dishonest as Trump? Definitely not.
Putin's personal approval ratings within Russia have dropped, on some measurements. Down to >60% or so, between there and 85% usually.
60%-85% approval ratings? Western politicians would KILL for those. Merz at 7%, Micron at 15%, Burnham already barely better.
Russians have criticisms of Putin, naturally. Few people actually like their govts, anywhere. Chinese people have the highest opinion in the world, I think. But Russians also know that absolutely, genuinely, they have a marvel in their leader.
The all-too-honest outburts of naked Russophobia in Western media and politicians comments have convinced the liberal 'waverers' that there might have been something in all the warnings they ignored as 'State disinformation'.
As for farmers, it's the propaganda, plain and simple. When Corbyn was gearing up to run the country, he visited the CBI and gave a speech right in the enemies den. He talked about the need for a state-lead industrial recovery, state-lead infrastructure renewal, putting Britain back to work. He and his shadow chancellor got a standing ovation. From the *CBI*!
A few months later that entire room went out and voted for the Tories, and got Clown Blojo instead of the man they had given an ovation to.
Lifelong indoctrination, and massive injections of election propaganda and hype.
And it always works best on those who think they are too intelligent to be affected.
Navalny - killed in a WESTERN assassination, his wife pre-invited to the NATO summit so she could inherit the grants (bribes) he used to run. When the state has a prisoner in a cell, they DO NOT locate extremely rare poisons from south America to do them in, when a staged 'prison fight' at the very minimum would be all that was required.
All of these ridiculously complex assassination attempts, supposedly on 'Putin's personal enemies" have every hallmark of WESTERN intel, specifically MIx and Mossad.
I think you'll find that >90% of such cases in the war are committed by the Ukr side, as Nazis are very well known for such behaviour. They are, indeed, proud of it.
Australians have been indoctrinated for as long as I can remember about 'Reds under the bed' and the Yellow Peril. Mostly American propaganda, when in truth it is the US that is the most aggressive and most corrupt of all nations. We like to maintain our suspicions about Russia and China because it comforts us to think that we are aligned with the good guys against the bad guys. For the US, we are useful idiots.
I can't quite understand what you mean about Lula. I've been through the election numbers, and they don't add up. I have serious doubts on the electoral process, the "statistical impossibilities" etc So, not "normal" at all.
Either miracle or hidden hand.
Or A.I. meddling.
Just don't agree on your views on Putin & Xi. Time will tell. Your obvious sympathy for socialism may cloud your judgement. Maybe.
Cheers
P S. I agree with Trump on this: the Brazil election was a "disgrace".
Have you considered that the odds on Balsanaro running a clean campaign are approaching zero?
So any "irregularities" may be caused by his 'side' also?
Lula is not so stupid as to imprison his political opponent the week after a victory. Kegseth, Kaya Callous - they're stupid enough. Not Lula. So whatever has got the Brazilian High Court so steamed up about Flavio, has probably got some serious teeth behind it.
And it is serious enough that on the spot, Trump, Rubio et al dropped Flavio and supported Lula's win.
It's a Parliamentary system. He's not a President, he's a Prime Minister. Please name ONE UK PM who was elected to that that position by a mass popular vote. Each side plays this game of faux 'outrage' when the other property-party team pulls it, but there's no way to change this, a single parliament can have several PMs and even Govts from it before being required to go back to the vote at the end of its mandate.
I think many voted for him because they saw, rightly or wrongly, an even worse candidate in K'Mala, and more importantly those who pulled her many strings.
There was a faint hope that Trump 2.0 would be as 'antiestablishment' and hopefully 'peacenik' as Trump 1.0.
The revulsion at 'Genocide Joe' was authentic. But there was no choice for any anti-zionist candidate.
People voted for Keir Starmer, and many others like Thatcher, or Blair in gone by years. The problem is that Starmer was replaced by Burnham. And Burnham doesn't admit general elections until 2029, I guess.
The only people that voted for them was in their local constituency. Their positions in the party were determined by the party. This goes for ALL prime ministers in the UK.
When people vote in the UK, they are voting strictly for constituencies. Not govt or party positions.
So when they decided to stay at home and give Starver a 'landslide', the ones that voted and voted for Labour expect that parliamentary mandate to last the term. To repeat - people don't vote for the PM, Foreign Minister etc, they only vote for their local constituency MP. Perhaps that MP will be chosen to lead the biggest party, then he will become PM.
Parliament is Sovereign.
Parliament does not have to call for fresh elections until around then, I think. Now, traditionally, a majority of MPs can bring down the govt and calls snap elections, if the MPs want. But under PM Scameron, along with a bucketload of other good old political traditions, it was trashed.
So to answer your point, why isn't there a General Election when the PM is changed? The simple answer is because the MPs don't want a general election. If they did, there would be one.
I don’t agree that the UK is as repressive as Russia.
Yes, there have been ridiculous arrests in this country (UK) for people who said things on social media which have similar numbers to Russia, but we are not peppered with propaganda (if anything, it’s far left propaganda-see BBC’s stitching together of Trump for Panorama) from the state in the same way Russia is, nor would we ever allow the imprisonment or killing of party political opposition leaders (as in if that ever happened, and it won’t, our leaders would be held accountable as our standards would demand it).
Putin is a psychopathic tyrant who far better fits the model of domination (whether that be his own people or other countries). As mentioned before here, I recommend watching Bill Browder on YT (or read his articles) for how Putin acts and how he “got rid” of the oligarchs not to mention Putin's Palace- surely the epitome of greed whilst he sends prisoners to die in war. I would also suggest he is most likely as anyone of the madmen to unleash a serious chemical attack before his demise. Even the maniacal KJU of North Korea has prepared for a successor, Putin, as far as I know has not-he cannot accept his own mortality. I don't see the logic in comparing the rates of child deaths between different warring countries (one atrocity does not justify/excuse another), they are all bad and should be judged independently.
Chinese people have no choice but to be content with the government- if you’re not officially a member of the CCP, you are a member of the CCP. We know what happens when you step out of line- you get paid a visit, disappear for a while then make a public apology and swear allegiance to the state. Liu Xiaobo is a prime example of how China deals with people who have different views. If you are a Uighur in Xian, it’s a concentration camp for you. This is simply not comparable to the UK today where of course we have criminality like every country does, but we would not stand for concentration camps in our own country or our political leaders assassinating each other. Recently Chinese “feelings were hurt” when a footballer said Mao (still revered in China-every shop virtually has his photo) was a dictator (which he clearly was) and they demanded (and got) an apology-can you imagine China ever ceding to a demand from another country like that? In fact, we cede far too much to China-they burn far more fossil fuels than we do but we must be net zero-why don’t they have to be also?
I can’t speak for everyone in England, but I certainly don’t care about the Royal Family (as in they are human like the rest of us, no privilege from blood) and neither do the people I live with, and they couldn’t be more British.
"Why, after his first disastrous showing, did 77million apparently sane and literate people vote to give him a second bite at the cherry? I haven’t spoken to any of them but we’ll see what they say of themselves."
Do you question their sanity? (Are they evangelicals?). ( I guess there’s an underlying association suggested here, between insanity and evangelism, true?)
They're free to chose. As for Britain, the guy wasn't elected, no vote from the people. I mean Burnham.
No, I definitely don't question their sanity, that's what makes it so difficult to understand. They're sane and yet they voted for the person who openly promised to act against their best interests. Farmers are the prime example. The only answer I can see is that he appealed to a baser, more primitive drive, to be "great again" without specifying what that meant.
As for other politicians, we are surely cursed with the most awful bunch of deadbeats, no-hopers and corrupt paedophiles since Adam was a pup. They're unspeakable although with Lula's win, it could have been worse. As far as I can see, Xi is the only politician doing a proper job. I think he's a very tough character but he seems to be doing his best to clean up the corruption. It seems most Chinese are content with their government, which definitely isn't true in the West.
Everybody hates Putin but should they? His first action was to get rid of the Yeltsin clan, three cheers, then he turned on the oligarchs and pulled them into line. Russia turned away from becoming a failed state like Libya or Syria or Somalia and their standard of living is as high as Western Europe. Yes, somewhat repressive but hardly worse than say UK at present. Is he a demon in Netanyahu's class? I would say not. Corrupt as Kushner? Probably not. As dishonest as Trump? Definitely not.
We live in interesting times, damn it.
Niall, Murdochreacy strikes again? :)
Putin's personal approval ratings within Russia have dropped, on some measurements. Down to >60% or so, between there and 85% usually.
60%-85% approval ratings? Western politicians would KILL for those. Merz at 7%, Micron at 15%, Burnham already barely better.
Russians have criticisms of Putin, naturally. Few people actually like their govts, anywhere. Chinese people have the highest opinion in the world, I think. But Russians also know that absolutely, genuinely, they have a marvel in their leader.
The all-too-honest outburts of naked Russophobia in Western media and politicians comments have convinced the liberal 'waverers' that there might have been something in all the warnings they ignored as 'State disinformation'.
As for farmers, it's the propaganda, plain and simple. When Corbyn was gearing up to run the country, he visited the CBI and gave a speech right in the enemies den. He talked about the need for a state-lead industrial recovery, state-lead infrastructure renewal, putting Britain back to work. He and his shadow chancellor got a standing ovation. From the *CBI*!
A few months later that entire room went out and voted for the Tories, and got Clown Blojo instead of the man they had given an ovation to.
Lifelong indoctrination, and massive injections of election propaganda and hype.
And it always works best on those who think they are too intelligent to be affected.
"Western politicians would KILL for those. "
He literally did- Sergei Magnitsky, Alexei Navalny to name but just two.
Navalny - killed in a WESTERN assassination, his wife pre-invited to the NATO summit so she could inherit the grants (bribes) he used to run. When the state has a prisoner in a cell, they DO NOT locate extremely rare poisons from south America to do them in, when a staged 'prison fight' at the very minimum would be all that was required.
All of these ridiculously complex assassination attempts, supposedly on 'Putin's personal enemies" have every hallmark of WESTERN intel, specifically MIx and Mossad.
The most obvious case being the Skripals.
Putin’s kill record, of civilians in Ukraine, dampens some of his assets, not to mention the torture and mistreatment of prisoners
Can't recall where I saw these figures, may have been Katie Halper:
In Ukraine, children comprise 0.3% of deaths. In Gaza they are 30% of deaths.
I think you'll find that >90% of such cases in the war are committed by the Ukr side, as Nazis are very well known for such behaviour. They are, indeed, proud of it.
Australians have been indoctrinated for as long as I can remember about 'Reds under the bed' and the Yellow Peril. Mostly American propaganda, when in truth it is the US that is the most aggressive and most corrupt of all nations. We like to maintain our suspicions about Russia and China because it comforts us to think that we are aligned with the good guys against the bad guys. For the US, we are useful idiots.
For the US we are simply a large aircraft carrier anchored off Asia, all the better to threaten the Asians with.
Beware of a larger one threatning you
I can't quite understand what you mean about Lula. I've been through the election numbers, and they don't add up. I have serious doubts on the electoral process, the "statistical impossibilities" etc So, not "normal" at all.
Either miracle or hidden hand.
Or A.I. meddling.
Just don't agree on your views on Putin & Xi. Time will tell. Your obvious sympathy for socialism may cloud your judgement. Maybe.
Cheers
P S. I agree with Trump on this: the Brazil election was a "disgrace".
Have you considered that the odds on Balsanaro running a clean campaign are approaching zero?
So any "irregularities" may be caused by his 'side' also?
Lula is not so stupid as to imprison his political opponent the week after a victory. Kegseth, Kaya Callous - they're stupid enough. Not Lula. So whatever has got the Brazilian High Court so steamed up about Flavio, has probably got some serious teeth behind it.
And it is serious enough that on the spot, Trump, Rubio et al dropped Flavio and supported Lula's win.
Thank you. Now I know Lula is not stupid. “Irregularites” as those that happened in the election surely required a great intelligence. Indeed.
It's a Parliamentary system. He's not a President, he's a Prime Minister. Please name ONE UK PM who was elected to that that position by a mass popular vote. Each side plays this game of faux 'outrage' when the other property-party team pulls it, but there's no way to change this, a single parliament can have several PMs and even Govts from it before being required to go back to the vote at the end of its mandate.
I think many voted for him because they saw, rightly or wrongly, an even worse candidate in K'Mala, and more importantly those who pulled her many strings.
There was a faint hope that Trump 2.0 would be as 'antiestablishment' and hopefully 'peacenik' as Trump 1.0.
The revulsion at 'Genocide Joe' was authentic. But there was no choice for any anti-zionist candidate.
Yeah, I know, about the difference.
People voted for Keir Starmer, and many others like Thatcher, or Blair in gone by years. The problem is that Starmer was replaced by Burnham. And Burnham doesn't admit general elections until 2029, I guess.
The only people that voted for them was in their local constituency. Their positions in the party were determined by the party. This goes for ALL prime ministers in the UK.
When people vote in the UK, they are voting strictly for constituencies. Not govt or party positions.
So when they decided to stay at home and give Starver a 'landslide', the ones that voted and voted for Labour expect that parliamentary mandate to last the term. To repeat - people don't vote for the PM, Foreign Minister etc, they only vote for their local constituency MP. Perhaps that MP will be chosen to lead the biggest party, then he will become PM.
Parliament is Sovereign.
Parliament does not have to call for fresh elections until around then, I think. Now, traditionally, a majority of MPs can bring down the govt and calls snap elections, if the MPs want. But under PM Scameron, along with a bucketload of other good old political traditions, it was trashed.
So to answer your point, why isn't there a General Election when the PM is changed? The simple answer is because the MPs don't want a general election. If they did, there would be one.
I don’t agree that the UK is as repressive as Russia.
Yes, there have been ridiculous arrests in this country (UK) for people who said things on social media which have similar numbers to Russia, but we are not peppered with propaganda (if anything, it’s far left propaganda-see BBC’s stitching together of Trump for Panorama) from the state in the same way Russia is, nor would we ever allow the imprisonment or killing of party political opposition leaders (as in if that ever happened, and it won’t, our leaders would be held accountable as our standards would demand it).
Putin is a psychopathic tyrant who far better fits the model of domination (whether that be his own people or other countries). As mentioned before here, I recommend watching Bill Browder on YT (or read his articles) for how Putin acts and how he “got rid” of the oligarchs not to mention Putin's Palace- surely the epitome of greed whilst he sends prisoners to die in war. I would also suggest he is most likely as anyone of the madmen to unleash a serious chemical attack before his demise. Even the maniacal KJU of North Korea has prepared for a successor, Putin, as far as I know has not-he cannot accept his own mortality. I don't see the logic in comparing the rates of child deaths between different warring countries (one atrocity does not justify/excuse another), they are all bad and should be judged independently.
Chinese people have no choice but to be content with the government- if you’re not officially a member of the CCP, you are a member of the CCP. We know what happens when you step out of line- you get paid a visit, disappear for a while then make a public apology and swear allegiance to the state. Liu Xiaobo is a prime example of how China deals with people who have different views. If you are a Uighur in Xian, it’s a concentration camp for you. This is simply not comparable to the UK today where of course we have criminality like every country does, but we would not stand for concentration camps in our own country or our political leaders assassinating each other. Recently Chinese “feelings were hurt” when a footballer said Mao (still revered in China-every shop virtually has his photo) was a dictator (which he clearly was) and they demanded (and got) an apology-can you imagine China ever ceding to a demand from another country like that? In fact, we cede far too much to China-they burn far more fossil fuels than we do but we must be net zero-why don’t they have to be also?
I can’t speak for everyone in England, but I certainly don’t care about the Royal Family (as in they are human like the rest of us, no privilege from blood) and neither do the people I live with, and they couldn’t be more British.
I feel sorry for Finkelstein
Are you familiar with Miko Peled? His book The General's Son sets it out in detail.