I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Some of them are retirement age. Would you stop their state pension ?
What if they have taken time off work to protest ?
What about those who are self employed ?
We have laws already to deal with them. Let it take its course.
Unlike the rest of this thread, On Topic. Kind of. I appreciate those in PBs Gamebook, Boards and Miniatures Club are unlikely to have come across it, but there was a seventies HC called Another Month in Georgia. Starring Lizzy Daze, Rishi Maxim, Keith Stroker, and featuring Suella Lottatang as the eponymous Georgia. What plot there was, as I recall, revolved around being in and out of Georgia, sometimes half way up Carolina, or all the way up in Virginia, over the course of about a month; though all outdoor sequences (both of them) were filmed in California.
Mike Smithson said: "One of the aspects of American politics that is not always appreciated in the UK is that each of the 50 states have different election laws." (As does DC.) Thank you for saying that.
A historical example: In 1869, Wyoming voted to give women the vote. Other states followed, and finally in 1919 Congress passed the 19th amendment, which was ratified by the necessary number of states on August 18, 1920. But, on this fundamental subject, for decades the states had "different election laws".
Frontier societies can be quite progressive. New Zealand was perhaps the first, with female suffrage nationally from 1893. Still very much a frontier place at the time.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Christ, I hope you never get anywhere near power!
I dislike these people’s approach and I want them dealt with under the law. You appear to want them to starve or freeze.
Rather disturbing today the number of PB Tories, former or present, who want anyone demonstrating in any way to be drawn and quartered, starved, etc. etc. (and also their families), without any legal process or investigation whatsoever other than the say so of the Met Police or its local equivalents.
Yes. When they speak about “the rule of law” I don’t think they know what it means.
There is frustration about how the police deal with the protests. Sitting in the road blocking cars, the police should move them on as soon as they get there, but seemingly don’t. When the public try to move them the police intervene. It’s easy for people to say just leave those who climb above motorways, but the police really cannot just leave them. If one fell and ended up causing a serious, or fatal crash, then there would be hell to pay. However, when they get hold of the protesters then there needs to be consequences, just as there was for the Father For Justice campaigners who did similar stunts.
Would help if there was a working justice system, you know, with courts and lawyers and judges and staff, and enough room for everyone, and translators and things.
Well if they're remanded without bail for 2 years pending a prosecution then they won't be committing any more offences in that time. 😉
Also true if every single person in the country were remanded without bail for 2 years. Are you sure you have completely mastered this "libertarian" thing?
They made the fatal error of stopping Barty in his wheels for 5 minutes. Libertarian principles go out of the nearside rear fanlight window.
Alternatively you might want to look up the meaning of the wink emoji in my response, Grandpa.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Christ, I hope you never get anywhere near power!
I dislike these people’s approach and I want them dealt with under the law. You appear to want them to starve or freeze.
Rather disturbing today the number of PB Tories, former or present, who want anyone demonstrating in any way to be drawn and quartered, starved, etc. etc. (and also their families), without any legal process or investigation whatsoever other than the say so of the Met Police or its local equivalents.
Yes. When they speak about “the rule of law” I don’t think they know what it means.
There is frustration about how the police deal with the protests. Sitting in the road blocking cars, the police should move them on as soon as they get there, but seemingly don’t. When the public try to move them the police intervene. It’s easy for people to say just leave those who climb above motorways, but the police really cannot just leave them. If one fell and ended up causing a serious, or fatal crash, then there would be hell to pay. However, when they get hold of the protesters then there needs to be consequences, just as there was for the Father For Justice campaigners who did similar stunts.
Would help if there was a working justice system, you know, with courts and lawyers and judges and staff, and enough room for everyone, and translators and things.
Well if they're remanded without bail for 2 years pending a prosecution then they won't be committing any more offences in that time. 😉
Also true if every single person in the country were remanded without bail for 2 years. Are you sure you have completely mastered this "libertarian" thing?
They made the fatal error of stopping Barty in his wheels for 5 minutes. Libertarian principles go out of the nearside rear fanlight window.
Alternatively you might want to look up the meaning of the wink emoji in my response, Grandpa.
Aye, right. Sarcasm doesn't always come over without it.
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
We're not, we vote on a Thursday and on Friday the new PM can be giving a speech outside 10 Downing Street.
America probably became independent to soon to have democracy properly embedded from us. A bit like the premature baby discussions earlier, they never came to full term and haven't adopted democracy properly as a result.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
How many of these protestors are on benefits?
As opposed to on a silver spoon with no real problems to worry about, so they do this instead?
Give them problems to worry about. £200k fines on their trust funds.
I think they should be fined more than what you earn in 3 months, surely? Either they are rich and can afford to pay, or they are poor and fuck 'em.
What I think needs to happen is the common sense solution, that the police come along and arrest them; they get a bollocking, if they keep doing it then they go to jail. I don't mind them protesting but it seems like a systematic failure that they are able to do this indefinete campaign of civil disobedience.
It is quite amusing though that Patel and Braverman, for all their hardline rhetoric, haven't made any real progress on this front. Maybe we need a Labour government to be tough on crime!
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
We're not, we vote on a Thursday and on Friday the new PM can be giving a speech outside 10 Downing Street.
America probably became independent to soon to have democracy properly embedded from us. A bit like the premature baby discussions earlier, they never came to full term and haven't adopted democracy properly as a result.
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
If the GOP end up with a majority of 5 or less then it means the overturning of the NY redistricting cost the Dems the House.
Dem Activist Twitter is furious with the New York Democratic Party and the Florida Democratic Party.
For basically the same reason. No grass roots connection between upper tier party apparatus and the foot sloggers. Florida organisation used to be there and has collapsed. New York has never been there.
It did seem that the media in the USA had a narrative and refused to divert from that .
The Dem disaster was peddled for weeks and them saying it was all about the economy and that abortion wouldn’t be a big factor .
The ones who were most guilty of pushing the abortion isn’t a big deal in the mid terms were not surprisingly men !
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by voters and legislators, not by courts. There are a number of defensible and rational views, and it is a conscience matter.
There may be some evidence that the (IMHO correct) decision of the SC to say it is a matter for voters not courts is having an effect. Good.
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by the woman who is pregnant.
Until birth?
No, until the fortieth trimester.
Yes, until birth.
OK, that's a position, but an extremist one. You won't find a lot of support for it.
I agree with Bart on that position. I trust the pregnant woman to make the right choice for the circumstance she finds herself in. I'm confident that they're only going to choose abortion at a late stage because of regrettable and extreme medical circumstances, and I think it's best to leave that choice with them, rather than to add to their difficulties at such a time.
Is there anywhere in the world that allows it currently?
The position in the UK is not all that far off. Although there's a time limit, there's an exception for a number of relevant medical situations.
It might be one of those situations a bit like "defund the police", or "climate reparations", where you can effectively implement the desired policy, in a lot more than 99.9% of cases, but with something that doesn't quite match the principle, but is a lot easier to get people to agree to - i.e. a time limit combined with exceptions for relevant medical circumstances.
Right. But AIUI Bartholomew doesn't want "exceptions for relevant medical circumstances", he wants no-questions-asked abortion on demand right up until birth.
I think there should be one question. "Are you sure?" And maybe a second "do you need any help or support"?
I trust women will only want it in extreme circumstances, and I would trust their judgement. Why not?
What if the mother and father want the baby up until Wk38 and then the father and mother fall out. The father wants the baby, the mother doesn't.
Its the mother's body until birth.
I find your argument every bit as absurd as the fundamentalist religious position that full moral and legal rights should be granted to the baby at conception.
I don't find Bart's position absurd per se. Birth is no more or less arbitrary a position than conception or 12 weeks or 15 weeks or 24 weeks or, as was discussed earlier, 12 and a third. I think 24 weeks is right. Bart thinks birth. A fundamental Catholic thinks conception. Ron DeSantis thinks 15 weeks. Any are reasonable positions. And just because the argument is debatable it doesn't therefore follow that the right answer is somewhere in the middle. What would be absurd though is not understanding the debatability of the subject and of brooking no dissent.
Indeed. How is birth any less reasonable than 24 weeks, or 22, or 36?
In one way I think the two extremes (conception or birth) are both more reasonable than an arbitrary and messy compromise at 24 weeks.
If abortion is murder, it should be conception. If abortion isn't murder, it should be birth.
You can't be half-pregnant, and you can't be half a murderer.
24 weeks is just a messy compromise, like Sunday trading laws, a silly and pointless sop to try and keep everyone happy. I would rather just treat the women with respect to make the appropriate decision and not second-guess them, which is essentially the law as it really operates in practice today anyway in this country already.
Having said that, I understand why many people are happier with the messy compromise. Doesn't mean I need to agree or respect it, but I respect other's rights to hold their own opinion - I just think all opinions apart from the woman's are irrelevant.
So if the father wants to keep the baby at Wk38 and the mother says no then the mother's view should obtain.
Is there an element of there having been an implicit contract in the conception of the baby.
But rape. Absolutely but this was against the will of the mother.
Is there not with a consensual pregnancy an agreement that both father and mother will produce a baby and therefore at Wk 38 with a father willing to look after the baby his view should be taken into account?
And on how many occasions do you think such a set of circumstances might obtain ? Pretty well never.
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
That is a good point. US politics hasn’t evolved from what you see in Wild West movies on TCM!
Matt Hancock just went around in circles, covered himself and someone he was responsible for in shit and insects, and achieved nothing.
Make your own jokes.
It was hysterical. 🤣 The real Hancock is even more ridiculous than his Spitting Image caricature.
The refuseniks not watching this series are the losers.
I don't as a matter of principle - I don't like seeing alien insects being scattered all over the UK and possibly new zoonoses introduced to the human race by eating weird things like marsupials' anal glands.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Christ, I hope you never get anywhere near power!
I dislike these people’s approach and I want them dealt with under the law. You appear to want them to starve or freeze.
Rather disturbing today the number of PB Tories, former or present, who want anyone demonstrating in any way to be drawn and quartered, starved, etc. etc. (and also their families), without any legal process or investigation whatsoever other than the say so of the Met Police or its local equivalents.
Yes. When they speak about “the rule of law” I don’t think they know what it means.
There is frustration about how the police deal with the protests. Sitting in the road blocking cars, the police should move them on as soon as they get there, but seemingly don’t. When the public try to move them the police intervene. It’s easy for people to say just leave those who climb above motorways, but the police really cannot just leave them. If one fell and ended up causing a serious, or fatal crash, then there would be hell to pay. However, when they get hold of the protesters then there needs to be consequences, just as there was for the Father For Justice campaigners who did similar stunts.
Would help if there was a working justice system, you know, with courts and lawyers and judges and staff, and enough room for everyone, and translators and things.
Well if they're remanded without bail for 2 years pending a prosecution then they won't be committing any more offences in that time. 😉
It's a bit off to whine about them being on the dole and then demand that they have free board and lodgings in the Dartmoor Britannia at HM, read your and mine, expence for 2 years.
That was Max who said they were on the dole.
I suspect that Tarquin and Griselda might find a gap year lodging at His Majesty's pleasure might be slightly less comfortable than what Mummy and Daddy offered. And no Nanny or Waitrose there either.
Satire. Powerful.
Honestly Bart, I don't like ad hominem arguments, but in the days I had to work for a living, I would have made out just fine on the chargeable hours that you spend posting on here. You are very clearly in a position where work is an entirely voluntary activity (or you have fatal familial insomnia and work night shifts), so what differentiates you from ~Tarquin?
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
If you're not standing bleary eyed in a near empty leisure centre at 4am next to Elmo, how can someone even tell it is real democracy?
Matt Hancock just went around in circles, covered himself and someone he was responsible for in shit and insects, and achieved nothing.
Make your own jokes.
It was hysterical. 🤣 The real Hancock is even more ridiculous than his Spitting Image caricature.
The refuseniks not watching this series are the losers.
I don't as a matter of principle - I don't like seeing alien insects being scattered all over the UK and possibly new zoonoses introduced to the human race by eating weird things like marsupials' anal glands.
I don't mind the cruelty to the celebrities, but do think the animals deserve more respect and kindness. They didn't ask to be dropped on Hancock's head.
Unlike the rest of this thread, On Topic. Kind of. I appreciate those in PBs Gamebook, Boards and Miniatures Club are unlikely to have come across it, but there was a seventies HC called Another Month in Georgia. Starring Lizzy Daze, Rishi Maxim, Keith Stroker, and featuring Suella Lottatang as the eponymous Georgia. What plot there was, as I recall, revolved around being in and out of Georgia, sometimes half way up Carolina, or all the way up in Virginia, over the course of about a month; though all outdoor sequences (both of them) were filmed in California.
Don’t know if this helps at all.
Liked. But you’ll have to spell out HC.
Anyone asking what is HC clearly signed up in PBs Gamebook, Boards and Miniatures Club 🤭
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
We're not, we vote on a Thursday and on Friday the new PM can be giving a speech outside 10 Downing Street.
America probably became independent to soon to have democracy properly embedded from us. A bit like the premature baby discussions earlier, they never came to full term and haven't adopted democracy properly as a result.
They got the representative government bit from us but they were ahead in the democratic bit. The Puritans were doing radical shit like electing their own church leadership, which threatened the established church here, so we kicked them out, so they went to New England and started doing the same there, but in towns as well as churches.*
*other radically oversimplified historical hot takes available on request.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Christ, I hope you never get anywhere near power!
I dislike these people’s approach and I want them dealt with under the law. You appear to want them to starve or freeze.
Rather disturbing today the number of PB Tories, former or present, who want anyone demonstrating in any way to be drawn and quartered, starved, etc. etc. (and also their families), without any legal process or investigation whatsoever other than the say so of the Met Police or its local equivalents.
Yes. When they speak about “the rule of law” I don’t think they know what it means.
There is frustration about how the police deal with the protests. Sitting in the road blocking cars, the police should move them on as soon as they get there, but seemingly don’t. When the public try to move them the police intervene. It’s easy for people to say just leave those who climb above motorways, but the police really cannot just leave them. If one fell and ended up causing a serious, or fatal crash, then there would be hell to pay. However, when they get hold of the protesters then there needs to be consequences, just as there was for the Father For Justice campaigners who did similar stunts.
Would help if there was a working justice system, you know, with courts and lawyers and judges and staff, and enough room for everyone, and translators and things.
Well if they're remanded without bail for 2 years pending a prosecution then they won't be committing any more offences in that time. 😉
Also true if every single person in the country were remanded without bail for 2 years. Are you sure you have completely mastered this "libertarian" thing?
They made the fatal error of stopping Barty in his wheels for 5 minutes. Libertarian principles go out of the nearside rear fanlight window.
Alternatively you might want to look up the meaning of the wink emoji in my response, Grandpa.
I just read that emoji as "I am a complete and utter wanker," rather than parsing the specific post in the light of it. My mistake.
Matt Hancock just went around in circles, covered himself and someone he was responsible for in shit and insects, and achieved nothing.
Make your own jokes.
It was hysterical. 🤣 The real Hancock is even more ridiculous than his Spitting Image caricature.
The refuseniks not watching this series are the losers.
I don't as a matter of principle - I don't like seeing alien insects being scattered all over the UK and possibly new zoonoses introduced to the human race by eating weird things like marsupials' anal glands.
I don't mind the cruelty to the celebrities, but do think the animals deserve more respect and kindness. They didn't ask to be dropped on Hancock's head.
And, of course, the next coronavirus or whatever that happens to be in a wallaby's prepuce for dinner. Would the celebs keep it to themselves? Course not.
Edit: suddenly realised the very specific irony of this.
Unlike the rest of this thread, On Topic. Kind of. I appreciate those in PBs Gamebook, Boards and Miniatures Club are unlikely to have come across it, but there was a seventies HC called Another Month in Georgia. Starring Lizzy Daze, Rishi Maxim, Keith Stroker, and featuring Suella Lottatang as the eponymous Georgia. What plot there was, as I recall, revolved around being in and out of Georgia, sometimes half way up Carolina, or all the way up in Virginia, over the course of about a month; though all outdoor sequences (both of them) were filmed in California.
Don’t know if this helps at all.
Liked. But you’ll have to spell out HC.
Anyone asking what is HC clearly signed up in PBs Gamebook, Boards and Miniatures Club 🤭
Matt Hancock just went around in circles, covered himself and someone he was responsible for in shit and insects, and achieved nothing.
Make your own jokes.
It was hysterical. 🤣 The real Hancock is even more ridiculous than his Spitting Image caricature.
The refuseniks not watching this series are the losers.
I don't as a matter of principle - I don't like seeing alien insects being scattered all over the UK and possibly new zoonoses introduced to the human race by eating weird things like marsupials' anal glands.
I don't mind the cruelty to the celebrities, but do think the animals deserve more respect and kindness. They didn't ask to be dropped on Hancock's head.
And, of course, the next coronavirus or whatever that happens to be in a wallaby's prepuce for dinner. Would the celebs keep it to themselves? Course not.
The delicious irony of the human race being wiped out by a Matt Hancock incubated virus would almost make it worthwhile
What happened, net, with the latest round of redistricting? "Although Republicans went into the cycle with control over drawing more districts, the number of Democratic-leaning seats actually increased as a result of redistricting. The new maps have six more Democratic-leaning seats than the old ones and the same number of Republican-leaning seats. This is due to aggressive map-drawing by Democrats in states such as Illinois as well as court decisions overturning Republican gerrymanders in states like North Carolina." source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/
I hope you will excuse a little cyncism on my part, but I have observed that the objections to gerrymandering come almost entirely from those who lose from it -- and those same people ignore it when it is done by their side, or even applaud it. Note, for example, that Illinois Democrats are just described as "aggressive".
What happened, net, with the latest round of redistricting? "Although Republicans went into the cycle with control over drawing more districts, the number of Democratic-leaning seats actually increased as a result of redistricting. The new maps have six more Democratic-leaning seats than the old ones and the same number of Republican-leaning seats. This is due to aggressive map-drawing by Democrats in states such as Illinois as well as court decisions overturning Republican gerrymanders in states like North Carolina." source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/
I hope you will excuse a little cyncism on my part, but I have observed that the objections to gerrymandering come almost entirely from those who lose from it -- and those same people ignore it when it is done by their side, or even applaud it. Note, for example, that Illinois Democrats are just described as "aggressive".
Gerrymandering is something where Republicans and Democrats are equally obnoxious.
There are two sorts of gerrymandering (a) where you try to maximise gains by creating seats with fair, but not overwhelming majorities (which means you can get wiped out in a bad year) and (b) where you create a firewall to protect what you have. Thanks to (b) it's now rather difficult for either party to get above 230 or so seats.
It did seem that the media in the USA had a narrative and refused to divert from that .
The Dem disaster was peddled for weeks and them saying it was all about the economy and that abortion wouldn’t be a big factor .
The ones who were most guilty of pushing the abortion isn’t a big deal in the mid terms were not surprisingly men !
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by voters and legislators, not by courts. There are a number of defensible and rational views, and it is a conscience matter.
There may be some evidence that the (IMHO correct) decision of the SC to say it is a matter for voters not courts is having an effect. Good.
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by the woman who is pregnant.
Until birth?
No, until the fortieth trimester.
Yes, until birth.
OK, that's a position, but an extremist one. You won't find a lot of support for it.
I agree with Bart on that position. I trust the pregnant woman to make the right choice for the circumstance she finds herself in. I'm confident that they're only going to choose abortion at a late stage because of regrettable and extreme medical circumstances, and I think it's best to leave that choice with them, rather than to add to their difficulties at such a time.
Is there anywhere in the world that allows it currently?
The position in the UK is not all that far off. Although there's a time limit, there's an exception for a number of relevant medical situations.
It might be one of those situations a bit like "defund the police", or "climate reparations", where you can effectively implement the desired policy, in a lot more than 99.9% of cases, but with something that doesn't quite match the principle, but is a lot easier to get people to agree to - i.e. a time limit combined with exceptions for relevant medical circumstances.
Right. But AIUI Bartholomew doesn't want "exceptions for relevant medical circumstances", he wants no-questions-asked abortion on demand right up until birth.
I think there should be one question. "Are you sure?" And maybe a second "do you need any help or support"?
I trust women will only want it in extreme circumstances, and I would trust their judgement. Why not?
What if the mother and father want the baby up until Wk38 and then the father and mother fall out. The father wants the baby, the mother doesn't.
Its the mother's body until birth.
I find your argument every bit as absurd as the fundamentalist religious position that full moral and legal rights should be granted to the baby at conception.
I don't find Bart's position absurd per se. Birth is no more or less arbitrary a position than conception or 12 weeks or 15 weeks or 24 weeks or, as was discussed earlier, 12 and a third. I think 24 weeks is right. Bart thinks birth. A fundamental Catholic thinks conception. Ron DeSantis thinks 15 weeks. Any are reasonable positions. And just because the argument is debatable it doesn't therefore follow that the right answer is somewhere in the middle. What would be absurd though is not understanding the debatability of the subject and of brooking no dissent.
I’m not sure that all of those positions are justifiable
Birth states that the unborn child has no rights, even when it is capable of living without the mother
Conception states that the mother has no rights even when the unborn child is completely dependent on her for its survival
Hence I end up with viability (a little earlier than you but that’s really a medical judgement as to precisely when - maybe 22 weeks)
You go with that, I go with birth.
When a born child is actually living in its own body and not someone else's, then it gains rights, until then the person whose body it is, is in control.
If 22 weeks is viable, why doesn't the NHS offer inductions at 22 weeks? If a woman wants to make such a weighty decision at 23 weeks that she does not want to carry a pregnancy to term, then she should not be subject to 4 more months of doing so against her will.
Because currently 22 weeks requires medical support. There is a material difference in life chances between 23/23/24 weeks. But the precise time is a medical judgement and not one I’m qualified to make.
If you were to argue that at 38 weeks an emergency C section with the child put up for adoption (funded by the state) is acceptable then I would be ok with that.
You are not. You are saying that a viable, living person should die because a woman decides for good, bad or indifferent reasons that he/she should die.
Foxy said: 'The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.'
News organizations giving people the news is "the craziest thing"? Didn't the BBC in the past use a mechanical "swingometer" to do much the same thing?
If you can get 6/1 on the Republicans taking the Senate, make the bet. The New York Times has it as 2/1.
Some good Republican results in New York and Arizona now mean the House is not in doubt. Both Gubernatorial candidates pulled out a lot of extra voters. As did the Dems in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Foxy said: 'The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.'
News organizations giving people the news is "the craziest thing"? Didn't the BBC in the past use a mechanical "swingometer" to do much the same thing?
They're not reporting on the final result. They're making educated guesses of what the result will be. And that always seems a bit strange from a British point of view.
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
To be fair the same thing happens in Australia and other countries.
It did seem that the media in the USA had a narrative and refused to divert from that .
The Dem disaster was peddled for weeks and them saying it was all about the economy and that abortion wouldn’t be a big factor .
The ones who were most guilty of pushing the abortion isn’t a big deal in the mid terms were not surprisingly men !
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by voters and legislators, not by courts. There are a number of defensible and rational views, and it is a conscience matter.
There may be some evidence that the (IMHO correct) decision of the SC to say it is a matter for voters not courts is having an effect. Good.
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by the woman who is pregnant.
Until birth?
No, until the fortieth trimester.
Yes, until birth.
OK, that's a position, but an extremist one. You won't find a lot of support for it.
I agree with Bart on that position. I trust the pregnant woman to make the right choice for the circumstance she finds herself in. I'm confident that they're only going to choose abortion at a late stage because of regrettable and extreme medical circumstances, and I think it's best to leave that choice with them, rather than to add to their difficulties at such a time.
Is there anywhere in the world that allows it currently?
The position in the UK is not all that far off. Although there's a time limit, there's an exception for a number of relevant medical situations.
It might be one of those situations a bit like "defund the police", or "climate reparations", where you can effectively implement the desired policy, in a lot more than 99.9% of cases, but with something that doesn't quite match the principle, but is a lot easier to get people to agree to - i.e. a time limit combined with exceptions for relevant medical circumstances.
Right. But AIUI Bartholomew doesn't want "exceptions for relevant medical circumstances", he wants no-questions-asked abortion on demand right up until birth.
I think there should be one question. "Are you sure?" And maybe a second "do you need any help or support"?
I trust women will only want it in extreme circumstances, and I would trust their judgement. Why not?
What if the mother and father want the baby up until Wk38 and then the father and mother fall out. The father wants the baby, the mother doesn't.
Its the mother's body until birth.
I find your argument every bit as absurd as the fundamentalist religious position that full moral and legal rights should be granted to the baby at conception.
I don't find Bart's position absurd per se. Birth is no more or less arbitrary a position than conception or 12 weeks or 15 weeks or 24 weeks or, as was discussed earlier, 12 and a third. I think 24 weeks is right. Bart thinks birth. A fundamental Catholic thinks conception. Ron DeSantis thinks 15 weeks. Any are reasonable positions. And just because the argument is debatable it doesn't therefore follow that the right answer is somewhere in the middle. What would be absurd though is not understanding the debatability of the subject and of brooking no dissent.
I’m not sure that all of those positions are justifiable
Birth states that the unborn child has no rights, even when it is capable of living without the mother
Conception states that the mother has no rights even when the unborn child is completely dependent on her for its survival
Hence I end up with viability (a little earlier than you but that’s really a medical judgement as to precisely when - maybe 22 weeks)
You go with that, I go with birth.
When a born child is actually living in its own body and not someone else's, then it gains rights, until then the person whose body it is, is in control.
If 22 weeks is viable, why doesn't the NHS offer inductions at 22 weeks? If a woman wants to make such a weighty decision at 23 weeks that she does not want to carry a pregnancy to term, then she should not be subject to 4 more months of doing so against her will.
I have a close relative, born at 22 and a bit weeks.
Reality makes an interesting contrast to theory.
Yet I support the 24 week limit. The real world is messy like that. It should be full of human compromises.
I have, in my extended family, an almost identical situation.
IVF, 22-23 weeks, twins, now in their mid teens, one with very serious developmental delays (no speech, but can work his way around YouTube on an iPad and find children’s programmes that he likes) - the other, doing his GCSEs with only minor issues.
The abortion issue simply ain’t simple. Those trying to distil the the issue to fundamental rights aren’t seriously engaging with the issue. These people poison the debate.
I think I am misunderstanding you.
Distilling it to fundamental rights is the only way to logically approach this. The mother has rights. The child has rights. You need to find a balance between them. That is neither conception nor birth.
Where it lies in between should be a matter for medicine - the difference in outcomes between your family members (if I may) shows how complicated it can be. I’m not qualified to say whether it is 24 weeks or some other period - that’s a medical judgement. What I would argue is that the time limits should be determined as a medical judgement and reviewed every few years as science improves
Lake continues to close in on Hobbs, Masters closes a little but still 84k adrift. Arizona wont be known for some time imo.
I think Lake wins, Masters falls short.
I tend to agree but there are, i think, enough votes left for Masters to get very close, very possibly into recount territory
There's around 33% of votes to go, and Masters has to overcome a five percentage point deficit. That means he needs to win the remainder by about 15 percentage points. That's a really tough ask.
At this stage in 2020, Biden was up two percentage points, and the race narrowed to a 0.3% lead.
NYTimes estimates the eventual margin will halve to 2.6% - that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
Foxy said: 'The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.'
News organizations giving people the news is "the craziest thing"? Didn't the BBC in the past use a mechanical "swingometer" to do much the same thing?
They're not reporting on the final result. They're making educated guesses of what the result will be. And that always seems a bit strange from a British point of view.
Educated guess is too weak a term. The confidence level is so high they almost never get it wrong nowadays.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Get them in heavy debt too. Then they won't want to lose their jobs because their children might starve. And if they protest at the weekend or in the evening, make them do two full-time jobs.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
How many of these protestors are on benefits?
As opposed to on a silver spoon with no real problems to worry about, so they do this instead?
Give them problems to worry about. £200k fines on their trust funds.
So every time some rich banker speeds ín his posh car, we do him for £20,000 fine for the first offence?
Actually I can get behind that one…..
You wouldn’t want to be in front of a speeding car…
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
It works in our system because the votes are all counted together with something like urgency, and once the task is done the full result can be announced.
In the US system with mail-in votes dribbling in days after the poll, and with a ‘relaxed’ approach to getting the job done in many counties, no-one would be interested in an official announcement days, weeks or in California months afterwards, when in most cases the result has been known for ages.
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Christ, I hope you never get anywhere near power!
I dislike these people’s approach and I want them dealt with under the law. You appear to want them to starve or freeze.
Rather disturbing today the number of PB Tories, former or present, who want anyone demonstrating in any way to be drawn and quartered, starved, etc. etc. (and also their families), without any legal process or investigation whatsoever other than the say so of the Met Police or its local equivalents.
Yes. When they speak about “the rule of law” I don’t think they know what it means.
There is frustration about how the police deal with the protests. Sitting in the road blocking cars, the police should move them on as soon as they get there, but seemingly don’t. When the public try to move them the police intervene. It’s easy for people to say just leave those who climb above motorways, but the police really cannot just leave them. If one fell and ended up causing a serious, or fatal crash, then there would be hell to pay. However, when they get hold of the protesters then there needs to be consequences, just as there was for the Father For Justice campaigners who did similar stunts.
If someone causes a fatal crash they are guilty of negligent homicide / manslaughter.
Apply the corporate manslaughter rules to their colleagues in the protest groups
I think all of these protestors show that our benefits system is too generous and too easy to game. Sanction every single one of their benefits for a minimum of a year. If they can protest, they can work full time jobs.
Christ, I hope you never get anywhere near power!
I dislike these people’s approach and I want them dealt with under the law. You appear to want them to starve or freeze.
Rather disturbing today the number of PB Tories, former or present, who want anyone demonstrating in any way to be drawn and quartered, starved, etc. etc. (and also their families), without any legal process or investigation whatsoever other than the say so of the Met Police or its local equivalents.
Yes. When they speak about “the rule of law” I don’t think they know what it means.
There is frustration about how the police deal with the protests. Sitting in the road blocking cars, the police should move them on as soon as they get there, but seemingly don’t. When the public try to move them the police intervene. It’s easy for people to say just leave those who climb above motorways, but the police really cannot just leave them. If one fell and ended up causing a serious, or fatal crash, then there would be hell to pay. However, when they get hold of the protesters then there needs to be consequences, just as there was for the Father For Justice campaigners who did similar stunts.
Would help if there was a working justice system, you know, with courts and lawyers and judges and staff, and enough room for everyone, and translators and things.
Well if they're remanded without bail for 2 years pending a prosecution then they won't be committing any more offences in that time. 😉
Also true if every single person in the country were remanded without bail for 2 years. Are you sure you have completely mastered this "libertarian" thing?
They made the fatal error of stopping Barty in his wheels for 5 minutes. Libertarian principles go out of the nearside rear fanlight window.
Alternatively you might want to look up the meaning of the wink emoji in my response, Grandpa.
I just read that emoji as "I am a complete and utter wanker," rather than parsing the specific post in the light of it. My mistake.
If you can get 6/1 on the Republicans taking the Senate, make the bet. The New York Times has it as 2/1.
Some good Republican results in New York and Arizona now mean the House is not in doubt. Both Gubernatorial candidates pulled out a lot of extra voters. As did the Dems in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Have had a nibble at 5.4. Should be tradeable if one of the races in the south west looks like going GOP.
Lake continues to close in on Hobbs, Masters closes a little but still 84k adrift. Arizona wont be known for some time imo.
I think Lake wins, Masters falls short.
I tend to agree but there are, i think, enough votes left for Masters to get very close, very possibly into recount territory
There's around 33% of votes to go, and Masters has to overcome a five percentage point deficit. That means he needs to win the remainder by about 15 percentage points. That's a really tough ask.
At this stage in 2020, Biden was up two percentage points, and the race narrowed to a 0.3% lead.
NYTimes estimates the eventual margin will halve to 2.6% - that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
I think Kari Lake has won the race for Governor, and has helped the Republicans take two Arizona House seats. She's one of the very few Trump-endorsed candidates who comes over well.
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
It works in our system because the votes are all counted together with something like urgency, and once the task is done the full result can be announced.
In the US system with mail-in votes dribbling in days after the poll, and with a ‘relaxed’ approach to getting the job done in many counties, no-one would be interested in an official announcement days, weeks or in California months afterwards, when in most cases the result has been known for ages.
Calling the USA the home of democracy, is exactly the little Englander mentality to a t. The hatred of anywhere foreign or non-white or historical or with garlic in it.
Hilarious and remarkable. Just for the record the word and the idea come from moussaka country.
It did seem that the media in the USA had a narrative and refused to divert from that .
The Dem disaster was peddled for weeks and them saying it was all about the economy and that abortion wouldn’t be a big factor .
The ones who were most guilty of pushing the abortion isn’t a big deal in the mid terms were not surprisingly men !
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by voters and legislators, not by courts. There are a number of defensible and rational views, and it is a conscience matter.
There may be some evidence that the (IMHO correct) decision of the SC to say it is a matter for voters not courts is having an effect. Good.
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by the woman who is pregnant.
Until birth?
No, until the fortieth trimester.
Yes, until birth.
OK, that's a position, but an extremist one. You won't find a lot of support for it.
I agree with Bart on that position. I trust the pregnant woman to make the right choice for the circumstance she finds herself in. I'm confident that they're only going to choose abortion at a late stage because of regrettable and extreme medical circumstances, and I think it's best to leave that choice with them, rather than to add to their difficulties at such a time.
Is there anywhere in the world that allows it currently?
The position in the UK is not all that far off. Although there's a time limit, there's an exception for a number of relevant medical situations.
It might be one of those situations a bit like "defund the police", or "climate reparations", where you can effectively implement the desired policy, in a lot more than 99.9% of cases, but with something that doesn't quite match the principle, but is a lot easier to get people to agree to - i.e. a time limit combined with exceptions for relevant medical circumstances.
Right. But AIUI Bartholomew doesn't want "exceptions for relevant medical circumstances", he wants no-questions-asked abortion on demand right up until birth.
I think there should be one question. "Are you sure?" And maybe a second "do you need any help or support"?
I trust women will only want it in extreme circumstances, and I would trust their judgement. Why not?
What if the mother and father want the baby up until Wk38 and then the father and mother fall out. The father wants the baby, the mother doesn't.
Its the mother's body until birth.
I find your argument every bit as absurd as the fundamentalist religious position that full moral and legal rights should be granted to the baby at conception.
I don't find Bart's position absurd per se. Birth is no more or less arbitrary a position than conception or 12 weeks or 15 weeks or 24 weeks or, as was discussed earlier, 12 and a third. I think 24 weeks is right. Bart thinks birth. A fundamental Catholic thinks conception. Ron DeSantis thinks 15 weeks. Any are reasonable positions. And just because the argument is debatable it doesn't therefore follow that the right answer is somewhere in the middle. What would be absurd though is not understanding the debatability of the subject and of brooking no dissent.
Indeed. How is birth any less reasonable than 24 weeks, or 22, or 36?
In one way I think the two extremes (conception or birth) are both more reasonable than an arbitrary and messy compromise at 24 weeks.
If abortion is murder, it should be conception. If abortion isn't murder, it should be birth.
You can't be half-pregnant, and you can't be half a murderer.
24 weeks is just a messy compromise, like Sunday trading laws, a silly and pointless sop to try and keep everyone happy. I would rather just treat the women with respect to make the appropriate decision and not second-guess them, which is essentially the law as it really operates in practice today anyway in this country already.
Having said that, I understand why many people are happier with the messy compromise. Doesn't mean I need to agree or respect it, but I respect other's rights to hold their own opinion - I just think all opinions apart from the woman's are irrelevant.
No.
Your position is that it’s the mother body until birth and that’s all that matters.
The fundamentalist religious position is that as soon as the sperm fertilised the egg, the blastocyst is a baby with the same rights as a baby. And that’s all that matters.
Both positions are absurd because lots of factors matter in any decision to abort a foetus.
Recognition of this reality was the genius behind the “legal, safe and rare” detente.
Now America, and unfortunately, I fear increasingly over here, we’re back to moral/religious absolutists vs liberal absolutists/women’s rights fundamentalists yelling themselves into opposing corners in a fight to impose their truth on society.
You’re cheering on this fight, which I think is a disaster. As you basically said, you’d rather completely lose the argument than live in the complicated, morally hazy reality, which is, I recon, the far more more mature position to take.
Let us have this never ending political and moral debate about the number of weeks, the viability of foetuses, the implications of various disabilities, the complexities of babies conceived through rape etc etc.
Your absolutist position is infantile.
Neither religion nor science assist the debate in any significant way.
It's logic plus values.
...plus reasoning plus analogy plus argument as to rights of all including the unborn (if any) and duties.
Science tells you nothing about what value and rights to place upon any individual from conception onwards, or its moral status. Religion cannot helpfully add to the general universal agreement that unjustified killing of humans is to be avoided, and dogmatic religious assertions don't advance argument.
I'm agreeing it isn't about all that. It's about - for me - American women losing something fundamental to their freedom and welfare which they'd had for 50 years. I'm actually not interested in the chinstroke. It's boring and off the point.
Clark county registrar of voters is saying turnout is 596k. 144k election day turnout. 195k early vote turnout. 258k absentee turnout (whatever that is).
Typical for American elections to not know either how many votes were cast and how many were counted!
FPTP isn't hard.
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
The craziest thing to me is that they seem to rely on press organisations "calling" elections, without any equivalent of a returning officer (backed by a man wearing a bin on his head) making an official declaration.
It works in our system because the votes are all counted together with something like urgency, and once the task is done the full result can be announced.
In the US system with mail-in votes dribbling in days after the poll, and with a ‘relaxed’ approach to getting the job done in many counties, no-one would be interested in an official announcement days, weeks or in California months afterwards, when in most cases the result has been known for ages.
Calling the USA the home of democracy, is exactly the little Englander mentality to a t. The hatred of anywhere foreign or non-white or historical or with garlic in it.
Hilarious and remarkable. Just for the record the word and the idea come from moussaka country.
Brazil does a more efficient job of counting votes than the USA.
Andy_JS said: "They're not reporting on the final result. They're making educated guesses of what the result will be. And that always seems a bit strange from a British point of view."
I understand that, and I rather like the British custom of having a returning officer announce the results, with the candidates standing there, wearing their color-coded rosettes. But I can also tell you that most Americans, accustomed to our far more complex elections, would find those ceremonies "a bit strange". But we wouldn't think they were "crazy".
It did seem that the media in the USA had a narrative and refused to divert from that .
The Dem disaster was peddled for weeks and them saying it was all about the economy and that abortion wouldn’t be a big factor .
The ones who were most guilty of pushing the abortion isn’t a big deal in the mid terms were not surprisingly men !
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by voters and legislators, not by courts. There are a number of defensible and rational views, and it is a conscience matter.
There may be some evidence that the (IMHO correct) decision of the SC to say it is a matter for voters not courts is having an effect. Good.
Abortion is a classic case of something which should be decided by the woman who is pregnant.
Until birth?
No, until the fortieth trimester.
Yes, until birth.
OK, that's a position, but an extremist one. You won't find a lot of support for it.
I agree with Bart on that position. I trust the pregnant woman to make the right choice for the circumstance she finds herself in. I'm confident that they're only going to choose abortion at a late stage because of regrettable and extreme medical circumstances, and I think it's best to leave that choice with them, rather than to add to their difficulties at such a time.
Is there anywhere in the world that allows it currently?
The position in the UK is not all that far off. Although there's a time limit, there's an exception for a number of relevant medical situations.
It might be one of those situations a bit like "defund the police", or "climate reparations", where you can effectively implement the desired policy, in a lot more than 99.9% of cases, but with something that doesn't quite match the principle, but is a lot easier to get people to agree to - i.e. a time limit combined with exceptions for relevant medical circumstances.
Right. But AIUI Bartholomew doesn't want "exceptions for relevant medical circumstances", he wants no-questions-asked abortion on demand right up until birth.
I think there should be one question. "Are you sure?" And maybe a second "do you need any help or support"?
I trust women will only want it in extreme circumstances, and I would trust their judgement. Why not?
What if the mother and father want the baby up until Wk38 and then the father and mother fall out. The father wants the baby, the mother doesn't.
Its the mother's body until birth.
I find your argument every bit as absurd as the fundamentalist religious position that full moral and legal rights should be granted to the baby at conception.
I don't find Bart's position absurd per se. Birth is no more or less arbitrary a position than conception or 12 weeks or 15 weeks or 24 weeks or, as was discussed earlier, 12 and a third. I think 24 weeks is right. Bart thinks birth. A fundamental Catholic thinks conception. Ron DeSantis thinks 15 weeks. Any are reasonable positions. And just because the argument is debatable it doesn't therefore follow that the right answer is somewhere in the middle. What would be absurd though is not understanding the debatability of the subject and of brooking no dissent.
Indeed. How is birth any less reasonable than 24 weeks, or 22, or 36?
In one way I think the two extremes (conception or birth) are both more reasonable than an arbitrary and messy compromise at 24 weeks.
If abortion is murder, it should be conception. If abortion isn't murder, it should be birth.
You can't be half-pregnant, and you can't be half a murderer.
24 weeks is just a messy compromise, like Sunday trading laws, a silly and pointless sop to try and keep everyone happy. I would rather just treat the women with respect to make the appropriate decision and not second-guess them, which is essentially the law as it really operates in practice today anyway in this country already.
Having said that, I understand why many people are happier with the messy compromise. Doesn't mean I need to agree or respect it, but I respect other's rights to hold their own opinion - I just think all opinions apart from the woman's are irrelevant.
No.
Your position is that it’s the mother body until birth and that’s all that matters.
The fundamentalist religious position is that as soon as the sperm fertilised the egg, the blastocyst is a baby with the same rights as a baby. And that’s all that matters.
Both positions are absurd because lots of factors matter in any decision to abort a foetus.
Recognition of this reality was the genius behind the “legal, safe and rare” detente.
Now America, and unfortunately, I fear increasingly over here, we’re back to moral/religious absolutists vs liberal absolutists/women’s rights fundamentalists yelling themselves into opposing corners in a fight to impose their truth on society.
You’re cheering on this fight, which I think is a disaster. As you basically said, you’d rather completely lose the argument than live in the complicated, morally hazy reality, which is, I recon, the far more more mature position to take.
Let us have this never ending political and moral debate about the number of weeks, the viability of foetuses, the implications of various disabilities, the complexities of babies conceived through rape etc etc.
Your absolutist position is infantile.
Neither religion nor science assist the debate in any significant way.
It's logic plus values.
...plus reasoning plus analogy plus argument as to rights of all including the unborn (if any) and duties.
Science tells you nothing about what value and rights to place upon any individual from conception onwards, or its moral status. Religion cannot helpfully add to the general universal agreement that unjustified killing of humans is to be avoided, and dogmatic religious assertions don't advance argument.
I'm agreeing it isn't about all that. It's about - for me - American women losing something fundamental to their freedom and welfare which they'd had for 50 years. I'm actually not interested in the chinstroke. It's boring and off the point.
And what about the freedom of the unborn child? I agree some of the state restrictions go too far but restrictions of 12 weeks for example in Florida are no different to those in Ireland or Italy or Germany for instance.
Andy_JS said: "They're not reporting on the final result. They're making educated guesses of what the result will be. And that always seems a bit strange from a British point of view."
I understand that, and I rather like the British custom of having a returning officer announce the results, with the candidates standing there, wearing their color-coded rosettes. But I can also tell you that most Americans, accustomed to our far more complex elections, would find those ceremonies "a bit strange". But we wouldn't think they were "crazy".
Andy_JS said: "They're not reporting on the final result. They're making educated guesses of what the result will be. And that always seems a bit strange from a British point of view."
I understand that, and I rather like the British custom of having a returning officer announce the results, with the candidates standing there, wearing their color-coded rosettes. But I can also tell you that most Americans, accustomed to our far more complex elections, would find those ceremonies "a bit strange". But we wouldn't think they were "crazy".
Clearly we need to kick it up a notch.
Returning officer indicates winner via duck duck goose
Lake continues to close in on Hobbs, Masters closes a little but still 84k adrift. Arizona wont be known for some time imo.
I think Lake wins, Masters falls short.
I tend to agree but there are, i think, enough votes left for Masters to get very close, very possibly into recount territory
There's around 33% of votes to go, and Masters has to overcome a five percentage point deficit. That means he needs to win the remainder by about 15 percentage points. That's a really tough ask.
At this stage in 2020, Biden was up two percentage points, and the race narrowed to a 0.3% lead.
NYTimes estimates the eventual margin will halve to 2.6% - that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
I think Kari Lake has won the race for Governor, and has helped the Republicans take two Arizona House seats. She's one of the very few Trump-endorsed candidates who comes over well.
Not to me she doesn't. But given the state of the orhers I suppose relatively speaking she does. The tv presenting background maybe helps.
Hope the believers cashed out while it was still “worth” something.
This is the year the house of cards is coming down, at last.
Each collapse of a 'coin' or 'exchange' leaves more crypto participants underwater on the amount of money they owe to someone else. That will create more forced sellers and continue to spiral until almost all bad faith actors in the market are removed.
The main lesson from this is that financial regulations, while imperfect, are there for a reason. A lot or consumers will be hurt badly from gambling in a series of unregulated Ponzi schemes.
Julia Davis @JuliaDavisNews Kremlin Cronies Sent Reeling on Live TV Over U.S. Midterm Elections.
Russia’s Tucker Carlson, top propagandist Vladimir Solovyov, said that the Kherson withdrawal was postponed to avoid inadvertently helping Joe Biden and the Democrats in the midterms.
If you can get 6/1 on the Republicans taking the Senate, make the bet. The New York Times has it as 2/1.
Some good Republican results in New York and Arizona now mean the House is not in doubt. Both Gubernatorial candidates pulled out a lot of extra voters. As did the Dems in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
House not in doubt - phew. I have more than I should on that.
Lake continues to close in on Hobbs, Masters closes a little but still 84k adrift. Arizona wont be known for some time imo.
I think Lake wins, Masters falls short.
I tend to agree but there are, i think, enough votes left for Masters to get very close, very possibly into recount territory
There's around 33% of votes to go, and Masters has to overcome a five percentage point deficit. That means he needs to win the remainder by about 15 percentage points. That's a really tough ask.
At this stage in 2020, Biden was up two percentage points, and the race narrowed to a 0.3% lead.
NYTimes estimates the eventual margin will halve to 2.6% - that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
I think Kari Lake has won the race for Governor, and has helped the Republicans take two Arizona House seats. She's one of the very few Trump-endorsed candidates who comes over well.
Not to me she doesn't. But given the state of the orhers I suppose relatively speaking she does. The tv presenting background maybe helps.
I think she comes over well to a lot of Americans.
The Crypto crash is not going to be pretty. I wonder how much it will impact other markets. Not much so far.
This is the failure of FTX in play - one of the two main players in the space.
Why is it failing? Because the other main player (Binance) caused a run on its token, which caused a liquidation cascade that's made the investment arm (Alameda) of FTX insolvent - in effect it's kinda a lehman brothers moment in terms of an over-leveraged player that was taking risks and gambling with clients money being knocked out of the market.
There is a reason the investment banking arm and the retail banking arm of banks are kept separate by law now, and that is playing out in the crypto space.
Now Binance wouldn't be making this play if they weren't pretty confident in the market long term - the aim is to knock the other player out of the market and become dominant, kinda like price dumping.
Frankly, anyone who keeps their crypto on an exchange gets everything they deserve. Everyone has known this since the MtGox era (when Bitcoin traded at about $1200) but still people don't learn their lesson.
Comments
Why is the home of democracy so shit at democracy?
Make your own jokes.
America probably became independent to soon to have democracy properly embedded from us. A bit like the premature baby discussions earlier, they never came to full term and haven't adopted democracy properly as a result.
It is quite amusing though that Patel and Braverman, for all their hardline rhetoric, haven't made any real progress on this front. Maybe we need a Labour government to be tough on crime!
For basically the same reason. No grass roots connection between upper tier party apparatus and the foot sloggers. Florida organisation used to be there and has collapsed. New York has never been there.
Pretty well never.
The refuseniks not watching this series are the losers.
Oh wait you meant send the votes to be counted in Sunderland.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8u3US5aD1Q
Honestly Bart, I don't like ad hominem arguments, but in the days I had to work for a living, I would have made out just fine on the chargeable hours that you spend posting on here. You are very clearly in a position where work is an entirely voluntary activity (or you have fatal familial insomnia and work night shifts), so what differentiates you from ~Tarquin?
https://twitter.com/BrendanMcP/status/1590337378534952975
*other radically oversimplified historical hot takes available on request.
GOP Senate majority 6+
Is it nearly over?
Edit: suddenly realised the very specific irony of this.
That's a huge bulkward against election theft attempts. You'll even seen the end of the stupid counting restrictions as well.
Well done Mastriano, well done Oz
Apparently it wouls have required 60% voting for an initiative in future in order to pass. Appropriately, just under 60% voted No to that.
Arizona voted down a proposition to allow the state lawmakers to amend or repeal voter approved initiatives (not finished counting)
Nevada has one amout implementing ranked choice voting.
Sadly, Louisiana has rejected deleting slavery as punishment for a crime (Tennessee looks set to approve this)
He is so dumb.
source: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/
I hope you will excuse a little cyncism on my part, but I have observed that the objections to gerrymandering come almost entirely from those who lose from it -- and those same people ignore it when it is done by their side, or even applaud it. Note, for example, that Illinois Democrats are just described as "aggressive".
(Me? I am against it wherever it is done -- though I do admire the artistry in, for example, the gerrymandering done in the past by Democrats in states like California and North Carolina. For an example, take a look at district 12, here: https://history.news.chass.ncsu.edu/2019/07/29/drawing-democracy-north-carolinas-gerrymandering-history/ )
There are two sorts of gerrymandering (a) where you try to maximise gains by creating seats with fair, but not overwhelming majorities (which means you can get wiped out in a bad year) and (b) where you create a firewall to protect what you have. Thanks to (b) it's now rather difficult for either party to get above 230 or so seats.
Hope the believers cashed out while it was still “worth” something.
Arizona wont be known for some time imo.
If you were to argue that at 38 weeks an emergency C section with the child put up for adoption (funded by the state) is acceptable then I would be ok with that.
You are not. You are saying that a viable, living person should die because a woman decides for good, bad or indifferent reasons that he/she should die.
News organizations giving people the news is "the craziest thing"? Didn't the BBC in the past use a mechanical "swingometer" to do much the same thing?
Some good Republican results in New York and Arizona now mean the House is not in doubt. Both Gubernatorial candidates pulled out a lot of extra voters. As did the Dems in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Doing the world's coolest things? Running Twitter sounds like a nightmare, even if you're any good at it, which he's not.
Ralston is spicey mood.
Distilling it to fundamental rights is the only way to logically approach this. The mother has rights. The child has rights. You need to find a balance between them. That is neither conception nor birth.
Where it lies in between should be a matter for medicine - the difference in outcomes between your family members (if I may) shows how complicated it can be. I’m not qualified to say whether it is 24 weeks or some other period - that’s a medical judgement. What I would argue is that the time limits should be determined as a medical judgement and reviewed every few years as science improves
At this stage in 2020, Biden was up two percentage points, and the race narrowed to a 0.3% lead.
NYTimes estimates the eventual margin will halve to 2.6% - that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
It's interesting to see how 'low' (for a very rich man) his wealth was estimated until just two years ago, increasing 9-10 fold.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#/media/File:Elon_Musk_net_worth_graph.png
Bezos is similar, though not quite as dramatic, whereas Gates and Buffett for example have been pretty stable.
BTW I have rich parents, and luck. I do not own twitter.
But I'm not uninterested in how Hancock is performing out there.
Advertisers aren’t coming back. This ship is going down.
https://twitter.com/nandoodles/status/1590409080673566722
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1590461754529959936
In the US system with mail-in votes dribbling in days after the poll, and with a ‘relaxed’ approach to getting the job done in many counties, no-one would be interested in an official announcement days, weeks or in California months afterwards, when in most cases the result has been known for ages.
Apply the corporate manslaughter rules to their colleagues in the protest groups
Clearly he is not. SpaceX alone is a stupendous achievement.
Cofounding Tesla, Paypal are also big, big achievements.
Luck actually plays a big role in everyone who makes it. So do parents who are well-off. So, why you sneer at him for this is beyond me.
The number of people who can overcome bad luck and an impoverished family background and yet still make it is vanishingly small.
I get you don't like him. And for sure, he doesn't understand how to run Twitter. But that doesn't make him dumb.
Hilarious and remarkable. Just for the record the word and the idea come from moussaka country.
73% counted
Dem / Hobbs 50.1%
GOP / Lake 49.9%
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2022/us/results
@afneil
·
50m
President Biden says it is intention to run again.
He's proving quite adept at it
I understand that, and I rather like the British custom of having a returning officer announce the results, with the candidates standing there, wearing their color-coded rosettes. But I can also tell you that most Americans, accustomed to our far more complex elections, would find those ceremonies "a bit strange". But we wouldn't think they were "crazy".
Poland still bans abortion in most circumstances
Each collapse of a 'coin' or 'exchange' leaves more crypto participants underwater on the amount of money they owe to someone else. That will create more forced sellers and continue to spiral until almost all bad faith actors in the market are removed.
The main lesson from this is that financial regulations, while imperfect, are there for a reason. A lot or consumers will be hurt badly from gambling in a series of unregulated Ponzi schemes.
@JuliaDavisNews
Kremlin Cronies Sent Reeling on Live TV Over U.S. Midterm Elections.
Russia’s Tucker Carlson, top propagandist Vladimir Solovyov, said that the Kherson withdrawal was postponed to avoid inadvertently helping Joe Biden and the Democrats in the midterms.
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1590450308119158786
Why is it failing? Because the other main player (Binance) caused a run on its token, which caused a liquidation cascade that's made the investment arm (Alameda) of FTX insolvent - in effect it's kinda a lehman brothers moment in terms of an over-leveraged player that was taking risks and gambling with clients money being knocked out of the market.
There is a reason the investment banking arm and the retail banking arm of banks are kept separate by law now, and that is playing out in the crypto space.
Now Binance wouldn't be making this play if they weren't pretty confident in the market long term - the aim is to knock the other player out of the market and become dominant, kinda like price dumping.
Frankly, anyone who keeps their crypto on an exchange gets everything they deserve. Everyone has known this since the MtGox era (when Bitcoin traded at about $1200) but still people don't learn their lesson.