At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
AUDIO of gaffe by Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries during speech at a Rugby League World Cup social impact event in St Helens earlier. “I’ve always quite liked the idea of rugby league - my long-standing memory is that 2003 drop-goal… Wow, what a moment that was.” Listen 👇
The next bit is almost worse... "I have heard that it’s um, and I know from my limited watching (I’m not going to pretend I’m an expert who watches it all the time)... but it’s an incredibly physical, sometimes quite brutal sport, and it often ends up in a scrum." @AccidentalP
Ah the Lib Dems are just errant socialists who will come to see the error of their ways as part of a progressive alliance when the time comes.
This myth is normally peddled by Labour folk, not normally by Lib Dems themselves.
I was thinking on this just yesterday, remembering my interactions with Labour councillors.
The biggest, overwhelming, difference isn’t one of policy but of attitude. Liberals put a value on independence of thought and action, socialists prize solidarity, loyalty and adherence to the party line. That’s a little glib, and I could have written a whole paragraph (but don’t feel like it). But the answer is in there somewhere.
Don't know about glib but it's a bit jaundiced! Stat of 1 - me - I have asked myself why I'm Lab not LD because it is an interesting thing to ponder. The main reason is my view that the government's top domestic priority, not the only one but the top one, should be to foster a more equal society.
Labour has become too much of a conduit for daft ideologically driven ideas (not saying they are unique in that!) and given their attractiveness to activist puritans that can make them dangerous. Lots of good people in the party but some ghastly ideological fixations bubbling away. I think there might be a real chance for LDs if they can pitch things effectively. There is a massive disaffected centrist pragmatist vote to be won by someone.
There is a lot of dislike and distrust of LP only offset by utterly crap nature of current government. Danger for Labour is that Tory MPs might kick out BoJo and appoint a better alternative so even Tories losing next election is not a certainty.
Perhaps that 'break the mould' will finally happen. LDs take LOTS of Con seats, Lab take fewer than hoped but just enough. 2 party politics becomes 3 party politics.
Unfortunately Lib Dem popularity is like blowing soap bubbles. It grows nicely through gentle exhalation but as soon as someone starts talking of breaking moulds and 3 party politics the party takes a big huff and pop, the bubble is burst for another few years.
Happened in 1983, 2010, 2019. Even a little in 2005.
Under FPTP Lib Dem seats are essentially almost perfectly negatively correlated with Tory vote share. Probably more so than Labour in fact.
Yes but GE24 could be an odd one, esp if the Cons keep Johnson and enthusiasm for Starmer remains muted. It could be that the Cons defend the RW quite effectively but get a whacking in the BW and certain other places. Potentially great for the LDs. Transformational even.
"Go back to your constituencies and prepare to have a serious say in the progressive alliance."
Or they could decide the mathematics means they have to prop up the Conservatives. Can't think when that has happened before, and it seems unlikely they would ever sell their souls to Satan, but there's always a first time.
What am I missing? I was here in the UK in 2010. Unless the Tory Party then was so different as for the Coalition not to count here.
Scots Nats don't do irony then.
I thought it was irony - but the situation with Cameron vs Johnson is so different that I wondered, or else there was something in the agreement I had missed.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
It’s fascinating that the SC seems to pull a shocker out pretty much weekly at the moment.
I haven’t read the logic on this one but the US has no hope of controlling carbon emissions if it is left to individual States.
And if the US wont control emissions no one else will even pretend they are trying.
I have discovered - probably years after everybody else - the very good “Rest is History” podcast.
Currently doing a mini-series if you like on the American Civil War.
Excellent stuff, clarifying for people like me who are quite ignorant about US history.
It leads me to wonder, what is the end goal for the Republicans today? Essentially it seems like they wish for unfettered rule in Red States where they can ban abortion, pump out emissions, and basically act like it’s still the 1980s until the cows come home.
I don’t think the States will break apart, but I guess that a long term decline in federal power seems inevitable, and that has geopolitical consequences to vis a vis trade deals, NATO, and America’s willingness to act as global policeman.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
It’s fascinating that the SC seems to pull a shocker out pretty much weekly at the moment.
I haven’t read the logic on this one but the US has no hope of controlling carbon emissions if it is left to individual States.
The one to watch for will be the SC ruling against States Rights when California sets emission and pollution standards. Because it is such a big part of the US economy, it can drag standards forward, by itself.
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
It's 5d chess. Trump can't run if they abolish the federal government before the next election.
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
Ah the Lib Dems are just errant socialists who will come to see the error of their ways as part of a progressive alliance when the time comes.
This myth is normally peddled by Labour folk, not normally by Lib Dems themselves.
No, Lib Dems are just Tories who think they're too nice to be Tories.
No, Lib Dems are just socialists who've realised socialism doesn't work.
Citation needed.
It seems clear to me that most LDs are, as a class, not suited to being Labour voters but disagree too much with the Tories to be conservatives. Most either agree with or don't question the economic system we're under, but want more public spending. They tend to be a bit less material in their politics - by which I mean their concerns are more about "elite politics", electoral and media reform and the EU being the most prominent, rather than bread and butter politics, where I think they are more distant from due simply to being the more PMC class.
Green voters are similar in that they tend towards being PMC, but also do tend to believe in socialism.
It would be rather good if for each political party there was a set of coherent, objective and consistent underlying principles, philosophies and beliefs out of which all their policies and actions sprang and which undergirded their policy and politics.
There aren't.
With that in mind, I am not sure how to translate this.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
I can easily see them getting rid of term limits on some spurious bollocks.
"It violates the 1st Admendment, or the 14th, or errrr, I dunno, but it's wrong so there"
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
President Joe Biden caught himself in the act of an embarrassing gaffe during a press conference on Thursday, mistakenly saying neutral Switzerland was joining NATO - rather than Sweden.
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
I can easily see them getting rid of term limits on some spurious bollocks.
"It violates the 1st Admendment, or the 14th, or errrr, I dunno, but it's wrong so there"
Interestingly, the Confederacy’s Constitution mandated a two term limit, about 100 years before the USA itself did.
The next bit is almost worse... "I have heard that it’s um, and I know from my limited watching (I’m not going to pretend I’m an expert who watches it all the time)... but it’s an incredibly physical, sometimes quite brutal sport, and it often ends up in a scrum." @AccidentalP
The next bit is almost worse... "I have heard that it’s um, and I know from my limited watching (I’m not going to pretend I’m an expert who watches it all the time)... but it’s an incredibly physical, sometimes quite brutal sport, and it often ends up in a scrum." @AccidentalP
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
The next bit is almost worse... "I have heard that it’s um, and I know from my limited watching (I’m not going to pretend I’m an expert who watches it all the time)... but it’s an incredibly physical, sometimes quite brutal sport, and it often ends up in a scrum." @AccidentalP
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago* they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
I can easily see them getting rid of term limits on some spurious bollocks.
"It violates the 1st Admendment, or the 14th, or errrr, I dunno, but it's wrong so there"
Interestingly, the Confederacy’s Constitution mandated a two term limit, about 100 years before the USA itself did.
Yes, this would be the huge worry with Trump. He would engineer his newly minted Court to block the term limits on some crappy grounds.
If they allow him to be re-elected democracy is finished in the US. I know it sounds hyperbole but I genuinely believe this. If re-elected he will stop at nothing to ensure it is for the rest of his life, even if that means tearing the entire country to pieces.
Anyone listening to the panel investigating what he did on 6th Jan can see this I think.
Justice Kagan: "Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change."
Jeez. This is heading towards a major constitutional crisis for the US. An overactive SC stuffed full of Trump's mad picks now taking a sledge hammer to federal power? Crazy.
And this is the warm for Trump's return. We 'aint seen anything yet unless they stop him running.
I can easily see them getting rid of term limits on some spurious bollocks.
"It violates the 1st Admendment, or the 14th, or errrr, I dunno, but it's wrong so there"
Perhaps it is time to add 4 more Justices? There were nine because there were originally nine Federal Circuit Courts. These days there are 13 Circuits so it could be justified as long as some balance could be put back in to the SC rather than having evangelical loonies legislating the Bible into law.
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Did Hillary really accept 2016? the media ran a blizzard of stories about Russia collusion and Russia influence, none of which stuck. You could argue the democrats started the 'we're not accepting this result' trend.
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
Translation hiccup, I think. Tank is char. Original is "une quantité significative de véhicules blindés" which I am reasonably sure means 'armoured vehicles' = AFVs rather than specifically tanks.
He should have changed the filibuster to stack the Supreme Court reversing the GOPs stacking last term. And made Puerto Rico and DC states.
Passing Roe v Wade legislation in Congress is too little, too late. Would be reversed by SCOTUS and/or Congress after the GOP regain power.
Yeah, the failure to make DC and PR states has been really baffling to me. If the current GOP had the kind of inbuilt disadvantage in the Senate that Dems do, they would almost certainly take in a super red state and a purplish red state, so why the Dems haven't even squeaked on it is insane.
It's also maddening that this was signalled 2 months ago, and the Dems didn't have legislation ready to go, as the GOP would. (Not to mention the maddening aspect of the Federalist Society existing for 40 years and working hand in glove with the GOP to get to this point and the Dems doing diddly around courts and in 2008 Rahm Emmanuel saying the courts were "not a priority")
Puerto Rico has only small majorities in favour of Statehood. They probably need to have a proper referendum (not the 2020 one), and - if it passes - they should formally apply to the US Government.
Why wasn't the 2020 one proper?
If we can't respect a 52/48 result as decisive then what can we?
Turnout was a scant 55%, which suggests that it wasn't taken that seriously.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h Even if he doesn't care about the facts or the economics, does Johnson have no-one to explain to him how *politically* suicidal a policy it is to attempt to shirk responsibility for inflation when it's headed to double digits?
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
Translation hiccup, I think. Tank is char. Original is "une quantité significative de véhicules blindés" which I am reasonably sure means 'armoured vehicles' = AFVs rather than specifically tanks.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 1h Even if he doesn't care about the facts or the economics, does Johnson have no-one to explain to him how *politically* suicidal a policy it is to attempt to shirk responsibility for inflation when it's headed to double digits?
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Did Hillary really accept 2016? the media ran a blizzard of stories about Russia collusion and Russia influence, none of which stuck. You could argue the democrats started the 'we're not accepting this result' trend.
Hillary:
* Called Trump to concede * Went to Trump's inaugaration
Trump:
* Called on Georgia's SoS to find extra votes * Called on State legislators to field parallel slates of Electors
They are - if you think about it - practically identical.
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
Translation hiccup, I think. Tank is char. Original is "une quantité significative de véhicules blindés" which I am reasonably sure means 'armoured vehicles' = AFVs rather than specifically tanks.
I’ve heard it suggested that the red line in question is sending Western tanks to Ukraine. Sending ex-Soviet Bloc T-72s seems to be fine - hence the U.K. swap with Poland.
Why this is more of a red line than Western artillery systems - not sure. More likely to be captured/destroyed?
Ah the Lib Dems are just errant socialists who will come to see the error of their ways as part of a progressive alliance when the time comes.
This myth is normally peddled by Labour folk, not normally by Lib Dems themselves.
I was thinking on this just yesterday, remembering my interactions with Labour councillors.
The biggest, overwhelming, difference isn’t one of policy but of attitude. Liberals put a value on independence of thought and action, socialists prize solidarity, loyalty and adherence to the party line. That’s a little glib, and I could have written a whole paragraph (but don’t feel like it). But the answer is in there somewhere.
Don't know about glib but it's a bit jaundiced! Stat of 1 - me - I have asked myself why I'm Lab not LD because it is an interesting thing to ponder. The main reason is my view that the government's top domestic priority, not the only one but the top one, should be to foster a more equal society.
Labour has become too much of a conduit for daft ideologically driven ideas (not saying they are unique in that!) and given their attractiveness to activist puritans that can make them dangerous. Lots of good people in the party but some ghastly ideological fixations bubbling away. I think there might be a real chance for LDs if they can pitch things effectively. There is a massive disaffected centrist pragmatist vote to be won by someone.
There is a lot of dislike and distrust of LP only offset by utterly crap nature of current government. Danger for Labour is that Tory MPs might kick out BoJo and appoint a better alternative so even Tories losing next election is not a certainty.
Perhaps that 'break the mould' will finally happen. LDs take LOTS of Con seats, Lab take fewer than hoped but just enough. 2 party politics becomes 3 party politics.
Unfortunately Lib Dem popularity is like blowing soap bubbles. It grows nicely through gentle exhalation but as soon as someone starts talking of breaking moulds and 3 party politics the party takes a big huff and pop, the bubble is burst for another few years.
Happened in 1983, 2010, 2019. Even a little in 2005.
Under FPTP Lib Dem seats are essentially almost perfectly negatively correlated with Tory vote share. Probably more so than Labour in fact.
Yes but GE24 could be an odd one, esp if the Cons keep Johnson and enthusiasm for Starmer remains muted. It could be that the Cons defend the RW quite effectively but get a whacking in the BW and certain other places. Potentially great for the LDs. Transformational even.
"Go back to your constituencies and prepare to have a serious say in the progressive alliance."
Or they could decide the mathematics means they have to prop up the Conservatives. Can't think when that has happened before, and it seems unlikely they would ever sell their souls to Satan, but there's always a first time.
What am I missing? I was here in the UK in 2010. Unless the Tory Party then was so different as for the Coalition not to count here.
Scots Nats don't do irony then.
I thought it was irony - but the situation with Cameron vs Johnson is so different that I wondered, or else there was something in the agreement I had missed.
Both Etonians, both Bullingdon boys. What's the difference? Buller, buller!
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago* they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
Translation hiccup, I think. Tank is char. Original is "une quantité significative de véhicules blindés" which I am reasonably sure means 'armoured vehicles' = AFVs rather than specifically tanks.
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
Translation hiccup, I think. Tank is char. Original is "une quantité significative de véhicules blindés" which I am reasonably sure means 'armoured vehicles' = AFVs rather than specifically tanks.
I’ve heard it suggested that the red line in question is sending Western tanks to Ukraine. Sending ex-Soviet Bloc T-72s seems to be fine - hence the U.K. swap with Poland.
Why this is more of a red line than Western artillery systems - not sure. More likely to be captured/destroyed?
They don’t want Western tanks and planes for two reasons. One is they don’t want the technology to fall into Russian hands, and the other is that they’re worried Russia might ask the Chinese for planes and tanks when Putin runs out of his own. A third reason would be the amount of training required.
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Did Hillary really accept 2016? the media ran a blizzard of stories about Russia collusion and Russia influence, none of which stuck. You could argue the democrats started the 'we're not accepting this result' trend.
Hillary:
* Called Trump to concede * Went to Trump's inaugaration
Trump:
* Called on Georgia's SoS to find extra votes * Called on State legislators to field parallel slates of Electors
They are - if you think about it - practically identical.
Also, impeaching a president for trying to withhold aid to Ukraine to extort personal political favours is identical to attempting an armed coup.
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Did Hillary really accept 2016? the media ran a blizzard of stories about Russia collusion and Russia influence, none of which stuck. You could argue the democrats started the 'we're not accepting this result' trend.
Hillary:
* Called Trump to concede * Went to Trump's inaugaration
Trump:
* Called on Georgia's SoS to find extra votes * Called on State legislators to field parallel slates of Electors
They are - if you think about it - practically identical.
There were serious attempts to get the electoral college to reject Trump.
This case brings into question the supremacy of state legislatures, which in turn could allow legislatures to ignore the popular vote for President and instead send slates the legislature chooses. If that was allowed in 2020, for example, Trump would still be in the WH. The argument goes that the constitution puts power into state legislatures as the place with greatest authority, that state and federal courts cannot overturn their will, and that their is no constitutional guarantee of one person one vote. That it has reached the docket at all suggests that their are potentially enough votes to give it the go ahead (based on previous writing it looks like Thomas, Alito, Barrett and Gorsuch may support this reading of the constitution).
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Did Hillary really accept 2016? the media ran a blizzard of stories about Russia collusion and Russia influence, none of which stuck. You could argue the democrats started the 'we're not accepting this result' trend.
Hillary:
* Called Trump to concede * Went to Trump's inaugaration
Trump:
* Called on Georgia's SoS to find extra votes * Called on State legislators to field parallel slates of Electors
They are - if you think about it - practically identical.
This case brings into question the supremacy of state legislatures, which in turn could allow legislatures to ignore the popular vote for President and instead send slates the legislature chooses. If that was allowed in 2020, for example, Trump would still be in the WH. The argument goes that the constitution puts power into state legislatures as the place with greatest authority, that state and federal courts cannot overturn their will, and that their is no constitutional guarantee of one person one vote. That it has reached the docket at all suggests that their are potentially enough votes to give it the go ahead (based on previous writing it looks like Thomas, Alito, Barrett and Gorsuch may support this reading of the constitution).
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
This case brings into question the supremacy of state legislatures, which in turn could allow legislatures to ignore the popular vote for President and instead send slates the legislature chooses. If that was allowed in 2020, for example, Trump would still be in the WH. The argument goes that the constitution puts power into state legislatures as the place with greatest authority, that state and federal courts cannot overturn their will, and that their is no constitutional guarantee of one person one vote. That it has reached the docket at all suggests that their are potentially enough votes to give it the go ahead (based on previous writing it looks like Thomas, Alito, Barrett and Gorsuch may support this reading of the constitution).
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
Translation hiccup, I think. Tank is char. Original is "une quantité significative de véhicules blindés" which I am reasonably sure means 'armoured vehicles' = AFVs rather than specifically tanks.
I’ve heard it suggested that the red line in question is sending Western tanks to Ukraine. Sending ex-Soviet Bloc T-72s seems to be fine - hence the U.K. swap with Poland.
Why this is more of a red line than Western artillery systems - not sure. More likely to be captured/destroyed?
They don’t want Western tanks and planes for two reasons. One is they don’t want the technology to fall into Russian hands, and the other is that they’re worried Russia might ask the Chinese for planes and tanks when Putin runs out of his own. A third reason would be the amount of training required.
I don’t think that the Ukrainians are worried about either.
They would love a few brigades of M1AX - given they would (mostly) be facing T72 with the armour upgrades missing, it would be like the first Gulf War. On a couple of occasions, Iraqi tanks were killed by a shot that killed a tank, went through it and killed another…
NATO might worry about technology capture.
Putin will try and buy stuff from the Chinese. Probably already is - the Chinese are probably not selling on the basis that it would be seen as taking sides in the West.
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
At a Rugby League World Cup press conference today. Nadine Dorries, sec of state for sport, is special guest. “I’ve always liked the idea of rugby league. That drop goal in 2003 was such a special moment.” That drop goal was actually in the Rugby Union World Cup.
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
Did Hillary really accept 2016? the media ran a blizzard of stories about Russia collusion and Russia influence, none of which stuck. You could argue the democrats started the 'we're not accepting this result' trend.
Hillary:
* Called Trump to concede * Went to Trump's inaugaration
Trump:
* Called on Georgia's SoS to find extra votes * Called on State legislators to field parallel slates of Electors
They are - if you think about it - practically identical.
There were serious attempts to get the electoral college to reject Trump.
If states send their own slate of electoral college rather than the ones picked by the voter then that's civil war surely?
What's the difference between say, granting the Welsh/Scottish/NI government more power and the Supreme Court returning power to state legislatures?
Voters in those states are at liberty to get rid of their legislatures.
The Roberts court has also made it their job to gut voting rights and challenges against jerrymandering as well.
It's all part of the same strategy - tell people in cases like Roe "this is a States' Rights issue, so if you care about it, vote" and then in cases like Shelby vs Holter don't allow the Federal Government to stop voter oppression, or in like half the cases this year uphold maps favouring the GOP on the basis it's too close to the election.
A good podcast for SCOTUS stuff is "5-4", they've been going for a few years now.
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Will it work after another two years of economic crisis?
No. The Conservatives under Boris keep lazily reaching into the historical playbook to try and replay angles of attack that worked well in the past but in a different context and a different time.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Will it work after another two years of economic crisis?
No. The Conservatives under Boris keep lazily reaching into the historical playbook to try and replay angles of attack that worked well in the past but in a different context and a different time.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
And of course we have had a coalition of chaos - Con + DUP.
Half empty, or half full? Yesterday, while skimming through the Washington Post, I first read this column: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/29/tuesday-republican-primary-results/ Which has this scary headline: "The latest GOP primary results had that bad-car-accident feel". And takes a pessimistic view of Trump's continued strength in the Republican Party:
"Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified Tuesday that watching the mob move toward the Capitol after Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021, was like a “bad car accident that was about to happen where you can’t stop it, but you want to be able to do something.”
That’s also how too many of this year’s Republican primaries feel, including the latest round on Tuesday in Illinois."
"Tuesday’s Republican primaries confirmed two trends we’ve been seeing throughout this campaign season: GOP voters are not buying Donald Trump’s election lies whole hog, and turnout augurs a big Republican wave in the fall.
Acolytes of the former president have regularly failed to defeat Republican candidates or incumbents who don’t vocally back his fetish about the 2020 election or Jan. 6, 2021. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) turned back a powerful Trump-backed challenger earlier this month, and Tuesday night four of five House members who voted for an independent Jan. 6 commission won renomination. None of those votes was close. "
The Post does have a wide range of opinion writers.
My own view? I'm closer to Henry Olsen, who wrote the second, than to James Hohmann, who wrote the first.
I don't know how busy the SC usually are, but the impression being given at the moment is of a court going about its activist work in a manner reminiscent of the brooms in Fantasia on all sorts of things.
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Will it work after another two years of economic crisis?
No. The Conservatives under Boris keep lazily reaching into the historical playbook to try and replay angles of attack that worked well in the past but in a different context and a different time.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
Yup. Even if you didn't agree with what the 2010-15 coalition did, it was reasonable to say it was non-chaotic. Go on- what was the worst shambles? A tax on pasties?
There is no way on God's good Earth that the Conservatives can run in 2023/4/5 on "a vote for us is a vote for stability."
But the striking thing about the government is that they are reaching back for past triumphs (see the strikes) as a kind of cargo cult- there's no sign of an understanding of what made those successes work.
I don't know how busy the SC usually are, but the impression being given at the moment is of a court going about its activist work in a manner reminiscent of the brooms in Fantasia on all sorts of things.
It is the end of session. Traditional they deliver all their most impactful ruling just before they head off on holiday.
The French are saying that they will send tanks to Ukraine. Just two weeks ago* they said there was a NATO agreement not to send tanks or fighter jets to Ukraine. I wonder what this means specifically.
Officiel du gouvernement - France France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there. 3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
The parlous state of democracy in the US is one of the reasons the UK needs to get its own house in order.
We can’t rely on the US to be “the shining city upon a hill”. Likely, we never could.
And you have moved there....
As an expat, rather than an immigrant. 😆 I admire the country, but I am not an American.
You are still going to be there when society collapse and the Everlasting TrumpReich takes over.
Actually my wife has told me we are not staying if Trump returns. Personally I tend to be a bit “render unto Caesar.”
Similar problem here. One of my buckets is a US odyssey, California, Deep South, New England, Florida. Couldn't do it with Trump as president, obviously, so started thinking seriously about it once Biden was sworn in. Allow for pandemic to properly end and plenty of planning (which is part of the pleasure) and we get 2025 as the time to pencil it in. Now it's under threat. Might need to rush it through a year earlier or even next year. Not ideal but it could be the one and only window.
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
How exactly is letting people who are eligible to vote, vote, undemocratic?
The parlous state of democracy in the US is one of the reasons the UK needs to get its own house in order.
We can’t rely on the US to be “the shining city upon a hill”. Likely, we never could.
And you have moved there....
As an expat, rather than an immigrant. 😆 I admire the country, but I am not an American.
You are still going to be there when society collapse and the Everlasting TrumpReich takes over.
Actually my wife has told me we are not staying if Trump returns. Personally I tend to be a bit “render unto Caesar.”
Similar problem here. One of my buckets is a US odyssey, California, Deep South, New England, Florida. Couldn't do it with Trump as president, obviously, so started thinking seriously about it once Biden was sworn in. Allow for pandemic to properly end and plenty of planning (which is part of the pleasure) and we get 2025 as the time to pencil it in. Now it's under threat. Might need to rush it through a year earlier or even next year. Not ideal but it could be the one and only window.
And they say accountants are boring. You’ve already been on holiday to Belgium in the last ten years, now you’re hating off to America sometime before 2040
There is a lot of whingeing today from the pro-Democrats here as well as the "Good v Evil" narrative going on so let me offer a riposte.
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
How exactly is letting people who are eligible to vote, vote, undemocratic?
I think the theory is that once state governments are in place, it's wrong for anyone to interfere with how they set the rules for their own re-election. Towards a United States of self-perpetuating oligarchies.
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Will it work after another two years of economic crisis?
No. The Conservatives under Boris keep lazily reaching into the historical playbook to try and replay angles of attack that worked well in the past but in a different context and a different time.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
Yup. Even if you didn't agree with what the 2010-15 coalition did, it was reasonable to say it was non-chaotic. Go on- what was the worst shambles? A tax on pasties?
There is no way on God's good Earth that the Conservatives can run in 2023/4/5 on "a vote for us is a vote for stability."
But the striking thing about the government is that they are reaching back for past triumphs (see the strikes) as a kind of cargo cult- there's no sign of an understanding of what made those successes work.
I don't think the current government is chaotic it's just listless and incompetent.
The coalition had a different problem: once it's agreed programme from the 2010 negotiations had been implemented it was really treading water from 2013 onwards in an atmosphere of mutual distrust.
A very clear take on the impact of Brexit on food security and the cost of living from @scotfoodjames: "Brexit has made absolutely nothing better and it's made a lot of things worse," citing: - Weaker pound - Extra costs for businesses - Labour market shortages - New red tape https://twitter.com/UKTradeBusiness/status/1542482615160143873/video/1
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Will it work after another two years of economic crisis?
No. The Conservatives under Boris keep lazily reaching into the historical playbook to try and replay angles of attack that worked well in the past but in a different context and a different time.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
And of course we have had a coalition of chaos - Con + DUP.
Theresa May shat the bed.
Corbyn would probably have always surged but she only had herself to blame for failing to secure a modest majority.
Sentences starting "Boris Johnson might be in more trouble than many think over .." have been common over recent years. Something will eject him from power eventually. Please, please let it be soon.
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Will it work after another two years of economic crisis?
No. The Conservatives under Boris keep lazily reaching into the historical playbook to try and replay angles of attack that worked well in the past but in a different context and a different time.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
Well put. I do wonder whether laziness may ultimately be Johnson's defining characteristic and the flaw that will do for him in the end.
Comments
“I’ve always quite liked the idea of rugby league - my long-standing memory is that 2003 drop-goal… Wow, what a moment that was.” Listen 👇
https://twitter.com/danroan/status/1542503588559085569
https://twitter.com/timjhanderson/status/1542506959424786432
Currently doing a mini-series if you like on the American Civil War.
Excellent stuff, clarifying for people like me who are quite ignorant about US history.
It leads me to wonder, what is the end goal for the Republicans today? Essentially it seems like they wish for unfettered rule in Red States where they can ban abortion, pump out emissions, and basically act like it’s still the 1980s until the cows come home.
I don’t think the States will break apart, but I guess that a long term decline in federal power seems inevitable, and that has geopolitical consequences to vis a vis trade deals, NATO, and America’s willingness to act as global policeman.
https://twitter.com/KierDoyle/status/1542478792618303488?s=20&t=ke3Z0e2gZ0kbPmGBYRYhug
Hopefully this doesn't give Boris and Mad Nad any ideas....
This isn't new. Compare Reagan as a figurehead vs Republican predecessors like LBJ or Nixon.
There aren't.
With that in mind, I am not sure how to translate this.
"It violates the 1st Admendment, or the 14th, or errrr, I dunno, but it's wrong so there"
President Joe Biden caught himself in the act of an embarrassing gaffe during a press conference on Thursday, mistakenly saying neutral Switzerland was joining NATO - rather than Sweden.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10969019/President-catches-NATO-gaffe-saying-Switzerland-joining-alliance.html
He must have been thinking about who won the rugby league world cup.
We can’t rely on the US to be “the shining city upon a hill”. Likely, we never could.
For more on this and other news visit http://trib.al/Rx0iR33
As @Alistair - a poster whom I don't share many views on at all - said, there are many ways to stage a coup. You can have armed force but you can equally have the A Very British Coup style. You can also have the coup via the legal system type.
The same types who are whingeing here about what the SC is doing are the same ones who completely ignored Democrats in swing states using their advantage in the legal system to push through a big loosening of voting procedures under the cover of the pandemic. In some cases, eg Pennsylvania, the courts specifically overrode the legislatures. Post-election, some of these measures were found to be illegal eg in Wisconsin but, by then, it was too late. In addition, we had the 'Zuck Bucks', nominally neutral but where much larger amounts were pushed into Democrat areas in swing states.
You didn't care about the courts then overriding the democratic system or the influence of billionaires' money then because it suited your own side and agenda. Your outrage is generated by the fact it's not your side winning in these cases, not the actual principle.
Which leads onto the next point. The real threat to the US is not the GOP but the thinking displayed on here that it is "Good vs Evil", Black v White when it comes to this matter when actually it's very much shades of Grey. Both sides are guilty of trying to rig the system for their benefit (the Democrats in yesterday's primaries actually put money into GOP primaries to support hardline conservative candidates whom they thought easier to beat). It will be the idea that one side is right and the other is wrong that will destroy US democracy and you are all showing today how and why it's such a danger.
https://order-order.com/2022/06/30/shadow-minister-resigned-three-hours-ago-no-one-noticed/
I have never even heard of the guy.
Some are very different in political outlooks to others. The contrasts between life in them are surely going to increase.
Some: Gas guzzling, gun toting, super fracking, abortion hating.
Others: Super green, gun banning, no fracking, abortion loving.
I admire the country, but I am not an American.
It's more about getting revenge on FDR for the New Deal.
But yes, it would likely declare such legislation unconstitutional given the current Catholic majority.
"They think it's all over ... it is now!"
[sorry - intended for CHB, not you ...]
"Emmanuel Macron
@EmmanuelMacron
Officiel du gouvernement - France
France will deliver swiftly equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, including 6 more Caesar howitzers and a significant number of tanks. France, the allies and European partners are and will be there.
3:38 PM · Jun 30, 2022"
https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1542517835770933248
It does seem as though the level of support provided to Ukraine is continuing to increase.
* https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3508605-macron-confirms-restrictions-on-sending-aircraft-and-tanks-to-ukraine.html
If they allow him to be re-elected democracy is finished in the US. I know it sounds hyperbole but I genuinely believe this. If re-elected he will stop at nothing to ensure it is for the rest of his life, even if that means tearing the entire country to pieces.
Anyone listening to the panel investigating what he did on 6th Jan can see this I think.
https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1542480626560942080?cxt=HHwWgICysaP9_ucqAAAA
@andrew_lilico
·
1h
Even if he doesn't care about the facts or the economics, does Johnson have no-one to explain to him how *politically* suicidal a policy it is to attempt to shirk responsibility for inflation when it's headed to double digits?
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico
====
Answers on a postcard please.
Didn't you get the memo?
* Called Trump to concede
* Went to Trump's inaugaration
Trump:
* Called on Georgia's SoS to find extra votes
* Called on State legislators to field parallel slates of Electors
They are - if you think about it - practically identical.
Why this is more of a red line than Western artillery systems - not sure. More likely to be captured/destroyed?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/19/electoral-college-faithless-electors-donald-trump
https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1542520127681286144?s=21&t=_OobxIB7d5gyAmG89YVLOA
This case brings into question the supremacy of state legislatures, which in turn could allow legislatures to ignore the popular vote for President and instead send slates the legislature chooses. If that was allowed in 2020, for example, Trump would still be in the WH. The argument goes that the constitution puts power into state legislatures as the place with greatest authority, that state and federal courts cannot overturn their will, and that their is no constitutional guarantee of one person one vote. That it has reached the docket at all suggests that their are potentially enough votes to give it the go ahead (based on previous writing it looks like Thomas, Alito, Barrett and Gorsuch may support this reading of the constitution).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
That is from 2019
The Conservatives are set to reprise their 2015 election message to thwart the Lib Dems march in the south, as Boris Johnson told me when we talked for an hour earlier this spring
Latest @FinancialTimes column https://www.ft.com/content/31a6ab0c-9435-493d-aaf9-14353021ad86
They would love a few brigades of M1AX - given they would (mostly) be facing T72 with the armour upgrades missing, it would be like the first Gulf War. On a couple of occasions, Iraqi tanks were killed by a shot that killed a tank, went through it and killed another…
NATO might worry about technology capture.
Putin will try and buy stuff from the Chinese. Probably already is - the Chinese are probably not selling on the basis that it would be seen as taking sides in the West.
Here is why from my Chopper's Politics Newsletter.
#PartygateCoverup
Sign up here: http://telegraph.co.uk/politicsnewsletter https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1542533394936086530/photo/1
SCOTUS just quietly slashed your Sixth Amendment rights
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3541102-scotus-just-quietly-slashed-your-sixth-amendment-rights/
What's the difference between say, granting the Welsh/Scottish/NI government more power and the Supreme Court returning power to state legislatures?
Voters in those states are at liberty to get rid of their legislatures.
It's all part of the same strategy - tell people in cases like Roe "this is a States' Rights issue, so if you care about it, vote" and then in cases like Shelby vs Holter don't allow the Federal Government to stop voter oppression, or in like half the cases this year uphold maps favouring the GOP on the basis it's too close to the election.
A good podcast for SCOTUS stuff is "5-4", they've been going for a few years now.
You need a clear contemporary message, competent leadership and a clear plan - otherwise these messages will fall flat, and might even backfire.
Westminster Voting Intention (29-30 June):
Labour 40% (-1)
Conservative 32% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 13% (-2)
Green 5% (+1)
Scottish National Party 5% (+1)
Reform UK 2% (-1)
Other 2% (+1)
Changes +/- 26 June
https://t.co/hdaJCJ6Vsi https://t.co/CLiCAu2jd8
Which has this scary headline: "The latest GOP primary results had that bad-car-accident feel". And takes a pessimistic view of Trump's continued strength in the Republican Party:
"Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified Tuesday that watching the mob move toward the Capitol after Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021, was like a “bad car accident that was about to happen where you can’t stop it, but you want to be able to do something.”
That’s also how too many of this year’s Republican primaries feel, including the latest round on Tuesday in Illinois."
And then I read this column: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/29/tuesdays-primaries-were-great-sign-non-trumpian-republicans/
Which has this cheerful headline: "Tuesday’s primaries were a great sign for non-Trumpian Republicans".
"Tuesday’s Republican primaries confirmed two trends we’ve been seeing throughout this campaign season: GOP voters are not buying Donald Trump’s election lies whole hog, and turnout augurs a big Republican wave in the fall.
Acolytes of the former president have regularly failed to defeat Republican candidates or incumbents who don’t vocally back his fetish about the 2020 election or Jan. 6, 2021. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) turned back a powerful Trump-backed challenger earlier this month, and Tuesday night four of five House members who voted for an independent Jan. 6 commission won renomination. None of those votes was close. "
The Post does have a wide range of opinion writers.
My own view? I'm closer to Henry Olsen, who wrote the second, than to James Hohmann, who wrote the first.
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1542535694257725441?s=20&t=1bXhRtUQjrrWld8YOBO6Bw
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/29/roe-v-wade-democratic-establishment-failures/
Go on- what was the worst shambles? A tax on pasties?
There is no way on God's good Earth that the Conservatives can run in 2023/4/5 on "a vote for us is a vote for stability."
But the striking thing about the government is that they are reaching back for past triumphs (see the strikes) as a kind of cargo cult- there's no sign of an understanding of what made those successes work.
Job still vacant after Oliver Dowden quit a week ago.
From Chopper's Politics Newsletter today: http://telegraph.co.uk/politicsnewsletter https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1542540124935815168/photo/1
https://api-esp.piano.io/story/estored/480/22334/-1/10227652/411592/vib-cl514evo10d2f010g6lwpcqpp?sig=5283cb310e2a5e67e699d6758cb3ec985913a78da8e8e8854439d709f161e3a8
Towards a United States of self-perpetuating oligarchies.
The coalition had a different problem: once it's agreed programme from the 2010 negotiations had been implemented it was really treading water from 2013 onwards in an atmosphere of mutual distrust.
- Weaker pound
- Extra costs for businesses
- Labour market shortages
- New red tape https://twitter.com/UKTradeBusiness/status/1542482615160143873/video/1
Corbyn would probably have always surged but she only had herself to blame for failing to secure a modest majority.
@CER_Grant
·
17h
Says one diplomat: 'Truss treats the diplomatic world as if it were the Tory party conf, always playing to the gallery.'
https://twitter.com/CER_Grant/status/1542281733541969920
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Wisconsin_State_Assembly_election