this was the point i really hammered home in this debate - the 'alarmists' have just been right, again & again - especially if you include the american case

at some point that's not just luck, we're seeing something about the world the 'anti-alarmists' are missing

bsky.app/profile/polp...

& i kinda did say that - i didn't predict the specifics, but i've been very clear what i think the direction of travel is

www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8DE...

if i'd told you this was gonna happen a few months ago, most people - certainly most in the media - would have thought i was insane

bsky.app/profile/polp...

no, but is generally suspected to have given it the green light

compare to:

aoc, 2018

pritzker, 2018

spanberger, 2019

sherrill, 2019

mamdani, 2021

telegraph i believe

a through line with this government is they're just not good decision makers

if they have a choice with negative consequences on both sides, they tend to keep delaying making it - even if that makes those consequences worse

(see also stalling on the ehrc guidance)

presumably, they didn't believe their own bs - that bringing more performative 'seriousness' to the role would make thing start improving by itself?

. . . but i had a sinking feeling they did (& many in the press clearly believed that)

like, presumably, they'd thought ahead at least a year or two - how did they think it was going to go?

I remember really wondering if i was missing something

it seemed obvious to me they wouldn't be able to run things in the tory tax/spend framework

it also seemed obvious that they were making this moment worse by insisting they would so emphatically