Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Will WH2024 really be a WH2020 re-run? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,721
edited July 2023 in General
imageWill WH2024 really be a WH2020 re-run? – politicalbetting.com

In 6 months time we will all be focused on the first primaries in the 2024 White House Race and currently of course the nominees look set to be Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,562
    I don't see what, besides his health or motivation, can stop Biden. Both seem to be holding so far. There's no other obvious candidate, especially since the token he moronically (or maybe very shrewdly) chose as VP has been so dismal.

    There's obviously lots that can stop Trump. He's had the luck of the Devil so far, somehow surviving horrific self-inflicted wounds, but luck can be a fickle mistress.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,574
    Second, like the Republican candidate
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427
    edited June 2023
    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,850
    edited June 2023
    Morning all 4th.

    Not sure on Mr Biden and Mr Twump.

    However Sub Brief (of Australian submarine fame) has a good shortish video looking at the design / construction of the Titan submarine, and its safety systems (possible lack of).

    Al the passengers had to sign a blunt disclaimer 'yes I know I could die'.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,574
    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    edited June 2023
    What the others are saying.

    If Trump drops out - or is rejected by the GOP - because of his criminal trials, which is beginning to seem quite likely to me, it doesn't make much difference to Biden getting the nomination.
    Unseating a sitting President, unless there's a disaster either on the health or political front, is a huge task.
    There are plenty of non loon (ie not RFK) contenders who've been quietly positioning themselves, but none seem very likely to run without that something happening to Biden.

    A non Trump opponent in the general election might be a much harder task for Biden, of course.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,850
    edited June 2023
    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    I am out of patience with this Supreme Court. They cannot continue to think they answer to no one. The drip, drip, drip of ethical wrongdoing must be met with real accountability.
    https://twitter.com/SenBlumenthal/status/1671858013412499458

    US Senator, and former AG for Connecticut.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98.
    A health event taking out Biden is clearly not impossible - but barring that, who is going to run against him that has not yet declared ?
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427
    edited June 2023
    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    Former Texas Rep. Will Hurd announces presidential bid
    Hurd enters the crowded presidential field as a major underdog.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/22/will-hurd-president-announcement-00103104
    ..The former congressman has been an outspoken critic of former President Donald Trump and said last month that a race between President Joe Biden and Trump would be a “rematch from hell.”
    “Someone like me, right, a dark horse candidate, can pull this off,” Hurd, 45, told “CBS Mornings” Thursday. “One, you can’t be afraid of Donald Trump. Too many of these candidates in this race are afraid of Donald Trump. But we also have to articulate a different vision.”..

  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,574
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Perhaps you should explain to us why amendments are things that can’t be changed?
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427
    edited June 2023
    As an aside to my last friendly rebuttal of Matt's erroneous comparison, I think it would be a really interesting exercise to run a survey on wins/losses by British residents on pb.com comparing between UK market bets and US bets.

    I strongly suspect that people who are resident in the UK and / or who have never studied US politics and the US constitution fare far worse with their political bets across the Atlantic than here.

    Generally it's best to bet with knowledge of the market.

    For instance, Mike is famously brilliant when it comes to betting on LibDem wins.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427
    I remember spending an entire year having to study just the US Senate Committees.

    They are a thing of wonder by the way.

    https://www.senate.gov/committees/

    https://www.congress.gov/committees

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Senate_committees

  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,850
    edited June 2023
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    Just the chamber of the Lords has sitting hours of almost 8 hours a day in the most recent summarised session - 2021-2022, with a daily attendance of 367 (it says on the Parliament website), plus all the other things they have to do.

    The Lords had a sitting until 4am on 8 June to try and sort out one of the dog's breakfasts - the Illegal Migration Bill - they had been sent by the Commons.

    The chamber does not have the constitution responsibilities of the Senate, however I think you mischaracterise to an extent.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,680
    Heathener said:

    As an aside to my last friendly rebuttal of Matt's erroneous comparison, I think it would be a really interesting exercise to run a survey on wins/losses by British residents on pb.com comparing between UK market bets and US bets.

    I strongly suspect that people who are resident in the UK and / or who have never studied US politics and the US constitution fare far worse with their political bets across the Atlantic than here.

    Generally it's best to bet with knowledge of the market.

    For instance, Mike is famously brilliant when it comes to betting on LibDem wins.

    OGH famously put up Obama at 50/1. Several of us won on Trump. In some ways, betting on American politics might be easier because we care less what will happen because we are not members or even supporters of one or other party.

    Against that, back home, many won on Brexit and Sindyref, as well as at by-elections and constituencies in general elections. Two reasons, perhaps. First, generously-donated spreadsheets, and second, a lot of political cleverclogs can't bet because they are simply too busy on election days, so the rest of us are betting against mug money.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427
    edited June 2023
    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427
    edited June 2023
    Anyway, I shall leave it there as I have work to do. Truly. And I have no intention of retiring when that day comes around.

    I close with a great quote from Logan Roy in Succession whilst he was on these shores:

    "I don’t like being out of the US too long. There’s a mercilessness I miss."
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,427

    Heathener said:

    As an aside to my last friendly rebuttal of Matt's erroneous comparison, I think it would be a really interesting exercise to run a survey on wins/losses by British residents on pb.com comparing between UK market bets and US bets.

    I strongly suspect that people who are resident in the UK and / or who have never studied US politics and the US constitution fare far worse with their political bets across the Atlantic than here.

    Generally it's best to bet with knowledge of the market.

    For instance, Mike is famously brilliant when it comes to betting on LibDem wins.

    OGH famously put up Obama at 50/1. Several of us won on Trump. In some ways, betting on American politics might be easier because we care less what will happen because we are not members or even supporters of one or other party.
    If they're honest, a lot of people lost money at the last US election.

    I had one of my most successful ever betting nights: on the Spreads betting against the market when people mis-read the Florida results as a sign Trump would be re-elected. In fact if you drilled into the sub-sets it was the Hispanic vote, not white suburbia. The latter were 'just' swinging to Biden, sufficiently so that I went big on that extending to the key swing states where the suburban vote would win or lose the election.

    I won very big that night. Many lost.
  • Options
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt.
    Hello Matt
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,206
    IanB2 said:

    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.

    And yet you will still find people on here defending this monstrosity.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,688
    edited June 2023
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I’d ask for a refund from your education establishment, University of Oxford I’m guessing.

    There are such things as unelected senators in America.

    https://www.senate.gov/senators/AppointedSenators.htm
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,206
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    As an aside to my last friendly rebuttal of Matt's erroneous comparison, I think it would be a really interesting exercise to run a survey on wins/losses by British residents on pb.com comparing between UK market bets and US bets.

    I strongly suspect that people who are resident in the UK and / or who have never studied US politics and the US constitution fare far worse with their political bets across the Atlantic than here.

    Generally it's best to bet with knowledge of the market.

    For instance, Mike is famously brilliant when it comes to betting on LibDem wins.

    OGH famously put up Obama at 50/1. Several of us won on Trump. In some ways, betting on American politics might be easier because we care less what will happen because we are not members or even supporters of one or other party.
    If they're honest, a lot of people lost money at the last US election.

    I had one of my most successful ever betting nights: on the Spreads betting against the market when people mis-read the Florida results as a sign Trump would be re-elected. In fact if you drilled into the sub-sets it was the Hispanic vote, not white suburbia. The latter were 'just' swinging to Biden, sufficiently so that I went big on that extending to the key swing states where the suburban vote would win or lose the election.

    I won very big that night. Many lost.
    I predicted the electoral college vote (numerically, not precisely its composition) perfectly. I should have put some money on it.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,192
    edited June 2023

    IanB2 said:

    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.

    And yet you will still find people on here defending this monstrosity.
    Not me - I've always thought it was a stupid idea.

    It was also really bad optics: and will give Labour free rein to do similar when they get into power, if they wanted (I hope they don't...)
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,192
    Currently, according to https://grid.iamkate.com/ :

    We are at 47.4% fossil fuels, and 20.6% renewables.

    Given on windy days we can easily see these figures reversed, it's clear that a workable form of energy storage (preferably medium-term storage) is vital. Goodness knows what form that will be, though.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,680
    Charlotte Owen ‘overstated her work for George Osborne’
    The former No 10 special adviser was included in Boris Johnson’s resignation honours list

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/charlotte-owen-linked-in-george-osbourne-boris-johnson-honours-list-566lbllj9 (£££)

    Unless Ms Owen was nominated for her work for Osborne, which I doubt, this hardly matters. Give her ermine or abandon the system where outgoing PMs can put up whoever they like. She will be a breath of fresh air in the House of Lords among peers ennobled for services to writing cheques.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    If Trump is convicted and jailed, I think much of the GOP establishment will rally around Pence. It could well be Pence v Biden.

    I also think Robert Kennedy Jnr will give Biden a fright in the Democratic primaries even if the President comes through in the end
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    That may be true for a few super rich and elite politician Americans, the average American certainly wants to retire by mid 60s
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,192
    HYUFD said:

    If Trump is convicted and jailed, I think much of the GOP establishment will rally around Pence. It could well be Pence v Biden.

    I also think Robert Kennedy Jnr will give Biden a fright in the Democratic primaries even if the President comes through in the end

    If I were to state in plain language my dislike of Robert Kennedy Jr, then I would get a permaban.

    He is really a **** of the ****** ***** who is bad for ***** and ***** and should just ***** and *******, the ****** ***** *****.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,537
    Am I right on thinking the last rematch between the same candidates was Eisenhower and Stevenson in 1956?

    So this would be quite the event.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,537

    HYUFD said:

    If Trump is convicted and jailed, I think much of the GOP establishment will rally around Pence. It could well be Pence v Biden.

    I also think Robert Kennedy Jnr will give Biden a fright in the Democratic primaries even if the President comes through in the end

    If I were to state in plain language my dislike of Robert Kennedy Jr, then I would get a permaban.

    He is really a **** of the ****** ***** who is bad for ***** and ***** and should just ***** and *******, the ****** ***** *****.
    Why do you like him so much?
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    I find this kind of question really interesting because different ways of thinking about it get you to really different places. On the one hand you've got, "All the polling and everything we know about the mechanism points to X". On the other hand you've got "X is ridiculous, surely people will find a way not to do this".
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,537
    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,661
    What does BID N20 mean - what are they trying to tell us??
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,680

    I find this kind of question really interesting because different ways of thinking about it get you to really different places. On the one hand you've got, "All the polling and everything we know about the mechanism points to X". On the other hand you've got "X is ridiculous, surely people will find a way not to do this".

    Not to mention time. There is still more than a year for events to intervene in a battle between two old men in an uncertain world.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,481

    IanB2 said:

    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.

    And yet you will still find people on here defending this monstrosity.
    I’d defend the principle but not the application. I believe that proving who you are and thus your right to vote is correct. I also believe the method put in place is wrong, and should be changed. Perhaps bring either the polling card OR you have to prove who you are.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,196
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
    Here I agree with you, HOL is full of dross, parfty grifters and donors etc. You coudl dump teh lot and nobody woudl notice the difference other than saving a couple of million a week on their troughing.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497

    Off-topic:

    I've just had an absolutely lovely run. It was not too hot this morning, and mist was rising from the grass after the overnight rain. Scores of rabbits were gambolling about, and a deer nonchalantly looked up as I jogged past.

    In these summer mornings, it is worth getting up early and going into the local countryside - or even a local park - just before and/or after dawn, to see nature at its freshest. One of life's free joys.

    We've not had any rabbits around here for over a year now as a virus took them all out. But it is a rare walk in the woods (my knees are not really up for running these days) where I don't see a deer, mainly roe but the odd red.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,670
    edited June 2023

    I find this kind of question really interesting because different ways of thinking about it get you to really different places. On the one hand you've got, "All the polling and everything we know about the mechanism points to X". On the other hand you've got "X is ridiculous, surely people will find a way not to do this".

    There are lots of ways of working out, both for political and betting purposes, what is going to occur in the future. "X is ridiculous, surely people will find a way not to do this" is among the least reliable. None of the other ways are very good either.

  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,019
    malcolmg said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
    Here I agree with you, HOL is full of dross, parfty grifters and donors etc. You coudl dump teh lot and nobody woudl notice the difference other than saving a couple of million a week on their troughing.
    Do you believe in a second chamber in general? I wonder if some of the Scottish Government's legal problems wouldn't have materialised if Holyrood had one.

    At least it acts as a deterrent against pushing through political legislation that doesn't really work.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,364
    Eabhal said:

    malcolmg said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
    Here I agree with you, HOL is full of dross, parfty grifters and donors etc. You coudl dump teh lot and nobody woudl notice the difference other than saving a couple of million a week on their troughing.
    Do you believe in a second chamber in general? I wonder if some of the Scottish Government's legal problems wouldn't have materialised if Holyrood had one.

    At least it acts as a deterrent against pushing through political legislation that doesn't really work.
    A modest proposal for HoL reform that needs no legislation is that an outgoing PM invites nominations from bodies whose knowledge and experience could enhance the Upper House and appoint them.

    I’m thinking the Royal Colleges (eg Nursing), trade bodies, unions, certain charities etc etc. If Sunak or Starmer said that is what they would do on departure it could (emphasis could) set a precedent successors would find hard to abandon.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,797
    Eabhal said:

    malcolmg said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
    Here I agree with you, HOL is full of dross, parfty grifters and donors etc. You coudl dump teh lot and nobody woudl notice the difference other than saving a couple of million a week on their troughing.
    Do you believe in a second chamber in general? I wonder if some of the Scottish Government's legal problems wouldn't have materialised if Holyrood had one.

    At least it acts as a deterrent against pushing through political legislation that doesn't really work.
    These are different things. The "legal problems" you speak of are matters of technical competence: does the Scottish Parliament have the authority to legislate on this or that matter or is it reserved. The Scottish Parliament is not sovereign.

    The UK Parliament is sovereign so in theory can legislate on anything it likes.

    Can't speak for Malcolm but I disagree strongly with the idea that an elected chamber needs a bunch of unelected people to mark its homework. The very idea is inherently conservative (it makes changing legislation more difficult). That might be desirable for some people, but it means introducing a political bias into the process of lawmaking itself. I don't believe we should stack the deck in favour of one ideology or another.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,850
    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,915

    What does BID N20 mean - what are they trying to tell us??

    They are obvously suggesting I should take the night bus route N20 from my house to Berlin's Hauptbahnhoff.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,797

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
    The Lords can introduce legislation as well though, no?
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,009
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    According to my spreadsheet, over the years I've had 22 bets on US events. In total I've lost £256 and won £548.
    I'm not a big stake punter.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    .
    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    The example of Diane Feinstein suggests otherwise.
    A significant difference is the amount of support staff behind US Senators. They can indeed phone it in for quite a while before it becomes disqualificatory, particularly in safe seats (though of course no one is entirely safe from primary challenge).
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    IanB2 said:

    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.

    The numbers will be much higher in the metropolitan areas which, of course, is the government's aim with this voter suppression.

  • Options

    What does BID N20 mean - what are they trying to tell us??

    N is the Currency Symbol for the Namibian Dollar.

    So if you're betting on Biden you should Bid (Bet) no more than N20 (20 Namibian Dollars).

    Which is about 85 pence.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    algarkirk said:

    I find this kind of question really interesting because different ways of thinking about it get you to really different places. On the one hand you've got, "All the polling and everything we know about the mechanism points to X". On the other hand you've got "X is ridiculous, surely people will find a way not to do this".

    There are lots of ways of working out, both for political and betting purposes, what is going to occur in the future. "X is ridiculous, surely people will find a way not to do this" is among the least reliable. None of the other ways are very good either.

    Sometimes it works though, for instance the way the Tories avoided running Boris Johnson again despite his popularity with his party, then again with Liz Truss.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,380

    IanB2 said:

    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.

    And yet you will still find people on here defending this monstrosity.
    If you can continue to defend Brexit and whatever the Tory party now is, the voter ID legislation is a piece of piss.
  • Options
    WestieWestie Posts: 426
    edited June 2023
    FPT
    Andy_JS said:

    I am ready for a fight. I genuinely hate the people who have been so protected whilst we get fucked.

    Put our lives on hold. Fucked.

    We should have all refused to lock down, it was a complete waste of time for us. The people protected will be dead soon, we've got years of this shit to come.

    I am so, so angry. I have no confidence Labour will sort it out - but the priority is getting Little Rishi and his bunch of fucktards out.

    Labour rarely sorts anything out.

    But joking aside, the younger generation do have legitimate complaint, though in my experience it is a little simplistic to make demographic divisions. There are plenty of entitled oldies and entitled youngers. There are plenty of whinging oldies and whinging youngsters. There are also those that work bloody hard, don't blame others and become a success in life however that looks, because they seize the day and look for the bright spots rather than the dark.

    There are plenty of reasons why we (particularly those in UK) should all be very grateful for the times we live in, despite Brexit, incoming Labour governments, Putin etc. Let us be grateful we were not born in Mariupol.
    You make a good point but I was addressing the overwhelming feeling we get from the media and so on who amplify it. I recall the week we spent discussing avocado on toast.

    I am not saying all elderly people are bad - but a large minority give the rest a bad name. And for them I am afraid I regret putting my life on hold.
    It wasn't just older people that were killed by Covid. Yes they were disproportionately effected. The lockdowns were not designed to save the elderly, they were designed to save our healthcare system. Funnily enough, the one system in Europe that is closest to our mad NHS system had no lockdown at all (Sweden). It will be interesting to reflect on which government got it right.

    Lockdown was pretty shit. But if you want to focus on the bright side by contrasting with the darkest, imagine what it must be like for those people in Ukraine at the moment, or even the parents of Russian soldiers. They really have had a lot to complain about.
    Around 1,000 people in the UK died from Covid on its own, the rest died "with Covid".
    That sounds about right. Or at least as an upper bound. I doubt there's even an official figure for this. It's not as if the state is saying the actual figure is 100,000. They don't want people to draw a distinction between "of" and "with". Probably quite a few people die "with" poor eyesight too.

    Few people are aware now, if they ever were, that "Covid" used to mean the illness caused in a few cases by a type of double pneumonia induced by the SARS variant SARSCoV2. ("NCIP" as it was called - "Novel Coronavirus-Induced Pneumonia"). But never mind. Most people were led to say things like they felt a bit Covidy if they had a cold. (F*cking drama-queen malingerers, basically.) Some even showed as SARSCoV2-positive because, after all, the said SARS variant WAS going around, even if it was harmless or almost harmless for a very large majority of those infected. So some with colds were positive, just as some without colds were positive. In most cases it should have been a case of so the f*ck what. Incidentally it's long been the case that many elderly patients catch pneumonia in hospitals. What a shocker.

    If someone said they'd had Covid, I always asked them how long they'd had the pneumonia for. Sometimes it's just too much strain to suffer cretins gladly.

    There's even more insane bullsh*t in this area than there is in woko-trans. We live in very sick times.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    Farooq said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
    The Lords can introduce legislation as well though, no?

    It's not a regular part of the system. The Lords is there primarily as a revising chamber. The US Senate is a regular source of proposed legislation.

  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
    Have the Lords ever tried the trick the US Senate uses to get around being banned from introducing spending bills, where they take some other bill that they had lying around waiting for them to vote on and revise it by replacing the entire thing?
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,911
    Parody Rishi Sunak
    @Parody_PM
    ·
    2m
    Seven years ago today we fooled over half the UK into voting for a pack of lies and impossible promises. Let's hope we can do the same at the next general election
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,818
    Nigelb said:

    What the others are saying.

    If Trump drops out - or is rejected by the GOP - because of his criminal trials, which is beginning to seem quite likely to me, it doesn't make much difference to Biden getting the nomination.
    Unseating a sitting President, unless there's a disaster either on the health or political front, is a huge task.
    There are plenty of non loon (ie not RFK) contenders who've been quietly positioning themselves, but none seem very likely to run without that something happening to Biden.

    A non Trump opponent in the general election might be a much harder task for Biden, of course.

    GOP primary voters are more willing to support Trump since the indictments, not less - they believe he won the 2020 election and this is a politically motivated witch hunt. Also whilst GOP primary voters do like DeSantis at the moment, I think if DeSantis hits out too much at Trump he'll start plummeting like the other candidates who have attacked him have.

    The biggest unknown here is age / health. If one of them dies, or gets very ill, then sure - someone else will get the nomination. But the Dems don't have a clear successor to Biden, because as usual the Democratic Party has done no long term political planning, and the GOP have DeSantis - but he is viewed as more moderate than he is by the GE electorate, which will change the moment he opens his mouth and starts talking about Making America Florida or whatever bile he wants.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,797
    Westie said:

    FPT

    Andy_JS said:

    I am ready for a fight. I genuinely hate the people who have been so protected whilst we get fucked.

    Put our lives on hold. Fucked.

    We should have all refused to lock down, it was a complete waste of time for us. The people protected will be dead soon, we've got years of this shit to come.

    I am so, so angry. I have no confidence Labour will sort it out - but the priority is getting Little Rishi and his bunch of fucktards out.

    Labour rarely sorts anything out.

    But joking aside, the younger generation do have legitimate complaint, though in my experience it is a little simplistic to make demographic divisions. There are plenty of entitled oldies and entitled youngers. There are plenty of whinging oldies and whinging youngsters. There are also those that work bloody hard, don't blame others and become a success in life however that looks, because they seize the day and look for the bright spots rather than the dark.

    There are plenty of reasons why we (particularly those in UK) should all be very grateful for the times we live in, despite Brexit, incoming Labour governments, Putin etc. Let us be grateful we were not born in Mariupol.
    You make a good point but I was addressing the overwhelming feeling we get from the media and so on who amplify it. I recall the week we spent discussing avocado on toast.

    I am not saying all elderly people are bad - but a large minority give the rest a bad name. And for them I am afraid I regret putting my life on hold.
    It wasn't just older people that were killed by Covid. Yes they were disproportionately effected. The lockdowns were not designed to save the elderly, they were designed to save our healthcare system. Funnily enough, the one system in Europe that is closest to our mad NHS system had no lockdown at all (Sweden). It will be interesting to reflect on which government got it right.

    Lockdown was pretty shit. But if you want to focus on the bright side by contrasting with the darkest, imagine what it must be like for those people in Ukraine at the moment, or even the parents of Russian soldiers. They really have had a lot to complain about.
    Around 1,000 people in the UK died from Covid on its own, the rest died "with Covid".
    That sounds about right. Or at least as an upper bound. I doubt there's even an official figure for this. It's not as if the state is saying the actual figure is 100,000. They don't want people to draw a distinction between "of" and "with". Probably quite a few people die "with" poor eyesight too.

    Few people are aware now, if they ever were, that "Covid" used to mean the illness caused in a few cases by a type of double pneumonia induced by the SARS variant SARSCoV2. ("NCIP" as it was called - "Novel Coronavirus-Induced Pneumonia"). But never mind. Most people were led to say things like they felt a bit Covidy if they had a cold. (F*cking drama-queen malingerers, basically.) Some even showed as SARSCoV2-positive because, after all, the said SARS variant WAS going around, even if it was harmless or almost harmless for a very large majority of those infected. So some with colds were positive, just as some without colds were positive. In most cases it should have been a case of so TF what. Incidentally it's long been the case that many elderly patients catch pneumonia in hospitals. What a shocker.

    If someone said they'd had Covid, I always asked them how long they'd had the pneumonia for. Sometimes it's just too much strain to suffer cretins gladly.
    Two points:
    Firstly, related to the number of deaths, how to you square what you've said with the excess deaths figure amounting to about 160,000?
    Secondly, if someone says they had Covid because they were sick with the coronavirus and you take that as an opportunity to call them a cretin, there's something deeply wrong with you.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,147

    What does BID N20 mean - what are they trying to tell us??

    It's BID≡N2024. The triple bar here denotes "is logically equivalent to", similar to the double bar "equals" sign in mathematics. It means that BID is logically equivalent to N2024, which is a reminder to Biden ("BID") to buy underpants - the "N2024" being a popular brand in Scranton due to its scratchy hardwearing material. Other slogans considered were "BID≡PIZZA" and "BID≡COFFEE" but were felt not to be as resonant.

    Trump' slogans are currently at the "KILLALLIMMIGRANTS" stage but are expected to be refined later in the cycle.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
    Not really; they are formally coequal chambers, with slightly different powers.

    Though perhaps the Senate could be regarded as the senior body given its minimum age requirement of 30 years, as opposed to the House's 25.
  • Options
    WestieWestie Posts: 426
    edited June 2023
    "My guess is that if either of them fell away then the other one would struggle.
    I plan to look at possible non-Trump/Biden alternatives in future posts.
    "

    Agreed.

    If Biden serves out his term without standing for re-election, it's obvious who he'll back: Kamala Harris. He won't back RFKJr. [1]

    Harris is huge value at 46. [2]

    And if Biden leaves office before the end of his term for some reason, Harris will run as the sitting president.

    Notes

    1) But RFKJr vs Trump would make for great theatre. And I wouldn't like to be in Anthony Fauci's shoes if that's the line-up.

    2) What a shame Harris is such an a*sehole. Personally my favoured candidate for next president is Michelle Obama. Unlikely to happen, though.
  • Options
    SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 6,373
    edited June 2023

    Farooq said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
    The Lords can introduce legislation as well though, no?

    It's not a regular part of the system. The Lords is there primarily as a revising chamber. The US Senate is a regular source of proposed legislation.

    It's not at all remarkable for Government bills to originate in the Lords. 10 of the 53 in the current session originated in the upper house. Private members bills in the House of Lords also aren't unusual.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,064
    DavidL said:

    Off-topic:

    I've just had an absolutely lovely run. It was not too hot this morning, and mist was rising from the grass after the overnight rain. Scores of rabbits were gambolling about, and a deer nonchalantly looked up as I jogged past.

    In these summer mornings, it is worth getting up early and going into the local countryside - or even a local park - just before and/or after dawn, to see nature at its freshest. One of life's free joys.

    We've not had any rabbits around here for over a year now as a virus took them all out. But it is a rare walk in the woods (my knees are not really up for running these days) where I don't see a deer, mainly roe but the odd red.
    Ditto here. Saw a young roe fawn in the long grass of a meadow within sight of houses the other day.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    Did anyone guess Cyprus ?

    Israel and Cyprus have held talks on the sale of Merkava tanks, Haaretz reports. If the deal is finalized, it will be the first sale of an Israeli tank to a European country. It is assumed that Nicosia plans to purchase new tanks to send its old Soviet T-80Us to Ukraine.
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1672147477183762432
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,064
    Nigelb said:

    IanB2 said:

    About 14,000 people were turned away from polling stations at May’s local elections because they lacked the right ID, with the overall number denied a vote likely to be considerably higher, the official elections watchdog has said.

    The interim study by the Electoral Commission also warned of “concerning” signs that voters with disabilities, people who are unemployed, or those from particular ethnic groups could be disproportionately affected by the policy.

    It also said that 4% of people who did not vote said it was because of voter ID – a tally that could run into hundreds of thousands more.

    So pretty much as predicted, and as intended by the policy's proponents.
    And repeatedly denied by those Tories on here who had the brass neck to support the policy.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,380
    Woke even reaches 20,000 leagues under the sea.


  • Options
    WestieWestie Posts: 426
    148grss said:

    Nigelb said:

    What the others are saying.

    If Trump drops out - or is rejected by the GOP - because of his criminal trials, which is beginning to seem quite likely to me, it doesn't make much difference to Biden getting the nomination.
    Unseating a sitting President, unless there's a disaster either on the health or political front, is a huge task.
    There are plenty of non loon (ie not RFK) contenders who've been quietly positioning themselves, but none seem very likely to run without that something happening to Biden.

    A non Trump opponent in the general election might be a much harder task for Biden, of course.

    GOP primary voters are more willing to support Trump since the indictments, not less - they believe he won the 2020 election and this is a politically motivated witch hunt. Also whilst GOP primary voters do like DeSantis at the moment, I think if DeSantis hits out too much at Trump he'll start plummeting like the other candidates who have attacked him have.

    The biggest unknown here is age / health. If one of them dies, or gets very ill, then sure - someone else will get the nomination. But the Dems don't have a clear successor to Biden, because as usual the Democratic Party has done no long term political planning, and the GOP have DeSantis - but he is viewed as more moderate than he is by the GE electorate, which will change the moment he opens his mouth and starts talking about Making America Florida or whatever bile he wants.
    If Biden dies, the Dems certainly would have a clear successor - the same person who would constitutionally succeed him as president. Cf. Gerald Ford.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,064
    Farooq said:

    Westie said:

    FPT

    Andy_JS said:

    I am ready for a fight. I genuinely hate the people who have been so protected whilst we get fucked.

    Put our lives on hold. Fucked.

    We should have all refused to lock down, it was a complete waste of time for us. The people protected will be dead soon, we've got years of this shit to come.

    I am so, so angry. I have no confidence Labour will sort it out - but the priority is getting Little Rishi and his bunch of fucktards out.

    Labour rarely sorts anything out.

    But joking aside, the younger generation do have legitimate complaint, though in my experience it is a little simplistic to make demographic divisions. There are plenty of entitled oldies and entitled youngers. There are plenty of whinging oldies and whinging youngsters. There are also those that work bloody hard, don't blame others and become a success in life however that looks, because they seize the day and look for the bright spots rather than the dark.

    There are plenty of reasons why we (particularly those in UK) should all be very grateful for the times we live in, despite Brexit, incoming Labour governments, Putin etc. Let us be grateful we were not born in Mariupol.
    You make a good point but I was addressing the overwhelming feeling we get from the media and so on who amplify it. I recall the week we spent discussing avocado on toast.

    I am not saying all elderly people are bad - but a large minority give the rest a bad name. And for them I am afraid I regret putting my life on hold.
    It wasn't just older people that were killed by Covid. Yes they were disproportionately effected. The lockdowns were not designed to save the elderly, they were designed to save our healthcare system. Funnily enough, the one system in Europe that is closest to our mad NHS system had no lockdown at all (Sweden). It will be interesting to reflect on which government got it right.

    Lockdown was pretty shit. But if you want to focus on the bright side by contrasting with the darkest, imagine what it must be like for those people in Ukraine at the moment, or even the parents of Russian soldiers. They really have had a lot to complain about.
    Around 1,000 people in the UK died from Covid on its own, the rest died "with Covid".
    That sounds about right. Or at least as an upper bound. I doubt there's even an official figure for this. It's not as if the state is saying the actual figure is 100,000. They don't want people to draw a distinction between "of" and "with". Probably quite a few people die "with" poor eyesight too.

    Few people are aware now, if they ever were, that "Covid" used to mean the illness caused in a few cases by a type of double pneumonia induced by the SARS variant SARSCoV2. ("NCIP" as it was called - "Novel Coronavirus-Induced Pneumonia"). But never mind. Most people were led to say things like they felt a bit Covidy if they had a cold. (F*cking drama-queen malingerers, basically.) Some even showed as SARSCoV2-positive because, after all, the said SARS variant WAS going around, even if it was harmless or almost harmless for a very large majority of those infected. So some with colds were positive, just as some without colds were positive. In most cases it should have been a case of so TF what. Incidentally it's long been the case that many elderly patients catch pneumonia in hospitals. What a shocker.

    If someone said they'd had Covid, I always asked them how long they'd had the pneumonia for. Sometimes it's just too much strain to suffer cretins gladly.
    Two points:
    Firstly, related to the number of deaths, how to you square what you've said with the excess deaths figure amounting to about 160,000?
    Secondly, if someone says they had Covid because they were sick with the coronavirus and you take that as an opportunity to call them a cretin, there's something deeply wrong with you.
    Re your second point, I wouldn't go quite so far - but it did occur to me that in the absence of free tests we're expecting people to pay good money in the current climate to test whether they had covid or a nasty dose of flu virus. Something which the covid deniers and denigrators in general would decry, in the same breath as they denied that there is/was any significant covid around, presumably?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057

    Farooq said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected for six years terms (there's no such thing as unelected or hereditary Senators) and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    Another major difference is that Senators are able to introduce legislation just as freely as Congressmen. So, the Senate is not a second chamber in the sense that might normally be understood in Europe - its role is not to revise, approve or reject legislation coming from the House of Representatives. Given its vetting role, though, you could see it as the senior chamber, perhaps.
    The Lords can introduce legislation as well though, no?

    It's not a regular part of the system. The Lords is there primarily as a revising chamber. The US Senate is a regular source of proposed legislation.

    It's not at all remarkable for Government bills to originate in the Lords. 10 of the 53 in the current session originated in the upper house. Private members bills in the House of Lords also aren't unusual.
    Bottom line, though, is that a British government's entire legitimacy derives from a majority in the Commons, and the latter could if it chose abolish the Lords.
    So in no sense are they coequal chambers. The US House and Senate are set up as such in Article 1 of the US Constitution.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,497
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Off-topic:

    I've just had an absolutely lovely run. It was not too hot this morning, and mist was rising from the grass after the overnight rain. Scores of rabbits were gambolling about, and a deer nonchalantly looked up as I jogged past.

    In these summer mornings, it is worth getting up early and going into the local countryside - or even a local park - just before and/or after dawn, to see nature at its freshest. One of life's free joys.

    We've not had any rabbits around here for over a year now as a virus took them all out. But it is a rare walk in the woods (my knees are not really up for running these days) where I don't see a deer, mainly roe but the odd red.
    Ditto here. Saw a young roe fawn in the long grass of a meadow within sight of houses the other day.
    Their numbers are seriously up, they must be causing significant losses to farmers.

    Talking of which, this story seems to be getting a surprising amount of attention: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65976472.amp

    The Scottish government has stopped the use of a chemical for controlling bracken and, indirectly ticks. The son of friends of ours lost 2 years of his life to Lymes disease, having to defer his University place. It is a deeply pernicious disease and he is still not fully over it.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,220
    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,026
    edited June 2023
    I think it will be - though DeSantis might have a bit of a run against Trump in the early primaries.

    I note the noise detected by sonar buoys was never mentioned on the news whereas "banging" (Which must have been a red herring) was.
    Were we just hearing hopeful wishcasting over the last week about this sub ? How many other areas does that extend to - the "experts" seemed all to be predicting lower inflation (Again hopeful wishcasting) and Ukraine is in the news far less when the counter offensive gets bogged down compared to any sort of breakthrough.

    Now I know the news is quite grim at the moment but it needs to be reported accurately rather than attempting to put a positive spin on everything.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    More similar to the Shuttle.
    Known risks, but ignored because it worked fine the first few times.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,976
    DougSeal said:

    Eabhal said:

    malcolmg said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
    Here I agree with you, HOL is full of dross, parfty grifters and donors etc. You coudl dump teh lot and nobody woudl notice the difference other than saving a couple of million a week on their troughing.
    Do you believe in a second chamber in general? I wonder if some of the Scottish Government's legal problems wouldn't have materialised if Holyrood had one.

    At least it acts as a deterrent against pushing through political legislation that doesn't really work.
    A modest proposal for HoL reform that needs no legislation is that an outgoing PM invites nominations from bodies whose knowledge and experience could enhance the Upper House and appoint them.

    I’m thinking the Royal Colleges (eg Nursing), trade bodies, unions, certain charities etc etc. If Sunak or Starmer said that is what they would do on departure it could (emphasis could) set a precedent successors would find hard to abandon.
    So, a bit like the Seanad Éireann.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    edited June 2023
    DougSeal said:



    A modest proposal for HoL reform that needs no legislation is that an outgoing PM invites nominations from bodies whose knowledge and experience could enhance the Upper House and appoint them.

    I’m thinking the Royal Colleges (eg Nursing), trade bodies, unions, certain charities etc etc. If Sunak or Starmer said that is what they would do on departure it could (emphasis could) set a precedent successors would find hard to abandon.

    That's the approach I've always favoured, with two tweaks:

    1. Legislation should always be introduced first in the Lords, so that the Commons benefits from the input of the experts in the Lords
    2. The Lords should lose its power of delay - new legislation should be considered expeditiously with timetanling, and if the Lords oppose something that should be purely advisory.

    As an MP, I was well aware that there were plenty of subjects about which I knew nothing, and with almost daily votes on everything the choice was either a crash course of intensive study every day (no time), relying on a briefing from an NGO (perhaps biased) or trusting the party to have got it right (er...but that's the default that you end up with if the legislation isn't high-profile). An opinion/recommendation from respected exprerts in the Lords would have been useful.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,220
    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    More similar to the Shuttle.
    Known risks, but ignored because it worked fine the first few times.
    That video says the sub had never been to 4000m.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,064
    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Off-topic:

    I've just had an absolutely lovely run. It was not too hot this morning, and mist was rising from the grass after the overnight rain. Scores of rabbits were gambolling about, and a deer nonchalantly looked up as I jogged past.

    In these summer mornings, it is worth getting up early and going into the local countryside - or even a local park - just before and/or after dawn, to see nature at its freshest. One of life's free joys.

    We've not had any rabbits around here for over a year now as a virus took them all out. But it is a rare walk in the woods (my knees are not really up for running these days) where I don't see a deer, mainly roe but the odd red.
    Ditto here. Saw a young roe fawn in the long grass of a meadow within sight of houses the other day.
    Their numbers are seriously up, they must be causing significant losses to farmers.

    Talking of which, this story seems to be getting a surprising amount of attention: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65976472.amp

    The Scottish government has stopped the use of a chemical for controlling bracken and, indirectly ticks. The son of friends of ours lost 2 years of his life to Lymes disease, having to defer his University place. It is a deeply pernicious disease and he is still not fully over it.
    Quite righ about deer; I do my best by buying and eating local venison, woke as it is.

    Ticks aren't particularly specific to bracken, though - they're quite happy to use long grass, heather, and so on as we know ourselves (even though we never wear shorts on country walks, tuck in our socks, etc). The worst problem is the small instars (immature ones) which are difficult to spot. We have a couple of cheap plastic tick extractors stashed in our rucksacks.

    eg https://www.tiso.com/s:tick/?search=tick

    Entirely agree re Lyme disease aka borreliosis - the cocnentric rash is pretty diagnostic but unforetunately not always present.

    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lyme-disease/
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    edited June 2023
    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    That may be true for a few super rich and elite politician Americans, the average American certainly wants to retire by mid 60s
    That's a slightly different point. "I want to retire before I'm old" is not incompatible with "I rdespect and will vote for people willing to carry on indefinitely".

    I think we overdo the ageism a bit in British politics. Speaking personally I'd be delighted to have another term and immodestly think I'd be better than some, but it's really unlikely to happen at age 73 so I'm not even trying. (Being CLP chair and on the Borough exec is a compromise.)

    Anecdotally, when I was one of Corbyn's constituents and had half an hour with him talking about diverse topics, I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords. He looked suitably nonplussed and we hastily moved on.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,157
    Westie said:


    If Biden serves out his term without standing for re-election, it's obvious who he'll back: Kamala Harris. He won't back RFKJr.

    I don't know if you meant to talk as if these are the only two options? If there's still time for a primary I think Biden would almost definitely do what Obama did and decline to endorse. There are a bunch of other Dems positioning themselves for this exact scenario, and Biden's team will likely tell him that they're more likely to beat Trump than Kamala.

    Where Kamala gets the nomination is if Biden fails to complete his term, or possibly by virtue of being the next-in-line if he drops out when it's too late for the primary voters to vote. Arguably in that situation he'd do her a favour by standing down before the election, so she gets the benefit of an inauguration bounce and potentially some incumbency.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,064
    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    Plently of Black submariners. The issue may be the Rickover safety culture of the US Submarine Service.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    More similar to the Shuttle.
    Known risks, but ignored because it worked fine the first few times.
    That video says the sub had never been to 4000m.
    From the reports, it seems fairly likely that it failed before it reached that depth.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,658
    Carnyx said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    Plently of Black submariners. The issue may be the Rickover safety culture of the US Submarine Service.
    Move fast and break things.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    edited June 2023

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    That may be true for a few super rich and elite politician Americans, the average American certainly wants to retire by mid 60s
    That's a slightly different point. "I want to retire before I'm old" is not incompatible with "I rdespect and will vote for people willing to carry on indefinitely".

    I think we overdo the ageism a bit in British politics. Speaking personally I'd be delighted to have another term and immodestly think I'd be better than some, but it's really unlikely to happen at age 73 so I'm not even trying. (Being CLP chair and on the Borough exec is a compromise.)

    Anecdotally, when I was one of Corbyn's constituents and had half an hour with him talking about diverse topics, I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords. He looked suitably nonplussed and we hastily moved on.
    I think you'd be a far more credible member of the Lords than many (if not most) who sit there, FWIW.

    So another example of Jeremy's poor judgment ?
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,955
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Off-topic:

    I've just had an absolutely lovely run. It was not too hot this morning, and mist was rising from the grass after the overnight rain. Scores of rabbits were gambolling about, and a deer nonchalantly looked up as I jogged past.

    In these summer mornings, it is worth getting up early and going into the local countryside - or even a local park - just before and/or after dawn, to see nature at its freshest. One of life's free joys.

    We've not had any rabbits around here for over a year now as a virus took them all out. But it is a rare walk in the woods (my knees are not really up for running these days) where I don't see a deer, mainly roe but the odd red.
    Ditto here. Saw a young roe fawn in the long grass of a meadow within sight of houses the other day.
    Their numbers are seriously up, they must be causing significant losses to farmers.

    Talking of which, this story seems to be getting a surprising amount of attention: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65976472.amp

    The Scottish government has stopped the use of a chemical for controlling bracken and, indirectly ticks. The son of friends of ours lost 2 years of his life to Lymes disease, having to defer his University place. It is a deeply pernicious disease and he is still not fully over it.
    Quite righ about deer; I do my best by buying and eating local venison, woke as it is.

    Ticks aren't particularly specific to bracken, though - they're quite happy to use long grass, heather, and so on as we know ourselves (even though we never wear shorts on country walks, tuck in our socks, etc). The worst problem is the small instars (immature ones) which are difficult to spot. We have a couple of cheap plastic tick extractors stashed in our rucksacks.

    eg https://www.tiso.com/s:tick/?search=tick

    Entirely agree re Lyme disease aka borreliosis - the cocnentric rash is pretty diagnostic but unforetunately not always present.

    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lyme-disease/
    Mrs Flatlander had Lyme a few years ago despite us always taking precautions. She had trouble persuading the local GP to give her the correct (3 week) dosage of antibiotics but we got there in the end and she's been OK.

    I've had 3 ticks so far this year - and that's just walking round innocuous local nature reserves in the Flatlands - wearing long trousers and gaiters - and not just western Scotland where they've always been a pain.

    Admittedly we tend to go off path through vegetation when surveying, but something has changed.

    I don't think it is climate but is likely to be a big increase in deer population.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    I think it will be - though DeSantis might have a bit of a run against Trump in the early primaries.

    I note the noise detected by sonar buoys was never mentioned on the news whereas "banging" (Which must have been a red herring) was.
    Were we just hearing hopeful wishcasting over the last week about this sub ? How many other areas does that extend to - the "experts" seemed all to be predicting lower inflation (Again hopeful wishcasting) and Ukraine is in the news far less when the counter offensive gets bogged down compared to any sort of breakthrough.

    Now I know the news is quite grim at the moment but it needs to be reported accurately rather than attempting to put a positive spin on everything.

    I'm not sure it's really "wishcasting" regarding the sub. It's perfectly good practice to treat that kind of operation as a search and rescue operation rather than recovery of wreckage until there is proof that there is nobody to rescue.

    Did all that many people really think that all crew being already dead wasn't a fairly likely outcome? Indeed, it's something of a relief if (as it appears) they died very quickly rather than very slowly. I'm not sure "there are a few hours of oxygen left and we can't locate them" ever really qualified as "positive spin" as you put it.

    This is like a major missing person search. Those involved need to treat it as if they are looking for a living person - that's practical, not delusional, because sometimes they are and you're more likely to find them in that case than if you're looking for a corpse. But we all know that often they're not.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,818
    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    That's nothing about wokery - that's about the "tech disruptor" mindset; "we don't need specialists or experts to build a submarine, we're going to be pioneers and do it ourselves"

    Also, like, it's a good way to make sure your labour is cheap
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,797

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    That may be true for a few super rich and elite politician Americans, the average American certainly wants to retire by mid 60s
    That's a slightly different point. "I want to retire before I'm old" is not incompatible with "I rdespect and will vote for people willing to carry on indefinitely".

    I think we overdo the ageism a bit in British politics. Speaking personally I'd be delighted to have another term and immodestly think I'd be better than some, but it's really unlikely to happen at age 73 so I'm not even trying. (Being CLP chair and on the Borough exec is a compromise.)

    Anecdotally, when I was one of Corbyn's constituents and had half an hour with him talking about diverse topics, I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords. He looked suitably nonplussed and we hastily moved on.
    As an MP, I was well aware that there were plenty of subjects about which I knew nothing... An opinion/recommendation from respected experts in the Lords would have been useful.

    I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords

    Anyone else see a contradiction here?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    Lest we forget the other Democratic candidate.

    Marianne Williamson loses second campaign manager in two months
    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/20/marianne-williamson-campaign-manager-00102692
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,311
    TimS said:

    Woke even reaches 20,000 leagues under the sea.


    "Let that sink in" was unfortunate
    In almost all cases, "Let that sink in" is a signifier that the previous statement is,at best, highly contentious, but is most likely simply rubbish.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,364

    DougSeal said:

    Eabhal said:

    malcolmg said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    I question this, as I have before.

    Long serving Senators in the US upper house may stay there for a long time.

    It is also the case here. In the UK upper house - the Lords - we have had plenty of people in their late 90s. The oldest current member is Lord Christopher, aged 98
    You may question Matt but as someone who studied US politics, formally for a qualification, I suggest your knowledge is lacking.

    There's a huge difference between Senators and Lords in the UK second chamber. Unlike the HoL, US Senators are all elected and they work hard: on average 70 hours a week. Lords here are unelected and don't even have to attend.

    This is another classic example of Brits completely failing to understand the US Constitution.

    From a betting point of view, don't bet on things you don't know much about.

    I question that as well. Perhaps we need to focus on what happens rather than what we imagine.

    I am Matt. The US Senate is a fully elected chamber and exercises huge constitutional power. The committee process, which I mentioned below, really is a thing of wondrous accountability and the UK Parliamentary committees derived from seeing how effective the ones in the US were.

    The HoL is a very different entity.

    My point is that Senators elected on six years terms, not plonked there for life, are accountable to the electorate and anyone who has even the slightest comprehension of US politics will know how full-bore, and often acrimonious, Senate elections are. Some of the Senate battles are truly mesmerising.

    If you're a Senator you know you face the electorate every six years. If you try to drift you will be taken down. It's all part of the intrinsically hard work ethos of the States which is so alien to the UK.

    As an aside, look at work and holidays. The average US worker gets just 14 days holiday a year.
    Here I agree with you, HOL is full of dross, parfty grifters and donors etc. You coudl dump teh lot and nobody woudl notice the difference other than saving a couple of million a week on their troughing.
    Do you believe in a second chamber in general? I wonder if some of the Scottish Government's legal problems wouldn't have materialised if Holyrood had one.

    At least it acts as a deterrent against pushing through political legislation that doesn't really work.
    A modest proposal for HoL reform that needs no legislation is that an outgoing PM invites nominations from bodies whose knowledge and experience could enhance the Upper House and appoint them.

    I’m thinking the Royal Colleges (eg Nursing), trade bodies, unions, certain charities etc etc. If Sunak or Starmer said that is what they would do on departure it could (emphasis could) set a precedent successors would find hard to abandon.
    So, a bit like the Seanad Éireann.
    Yes
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,147
    tlg86 said:

    Nigelb said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    More similar to the Shuttle.
    Known risks, but ignored because it worked fine the first few times.
    That video says the sub had never been to 4000m.
    I'm listening to it now. I think it says "had never been to 4000m without customers on board", which is different.

    I like the "SubBrief" guy - I've cited him here before. He's rather scathing on the submarine that broke. I didn't realise how simple the sub interior is, like a tin can with very little bolted to the walls.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    Farooq said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    That may be true for a few super rich and elite politician Americans, the average American certainly wants to retire by mid 60s
    That's a slightly different point. "I want to retire before I'm old" is not incompatible with "I rdespect and will vote for people willing to carry on indefinitely".

    I think we overdo the ageism a bit in British politics. Speaking personally I'd be delighted to have another term and immodestly think I'd be better than some, but it's really unlikely to happen at age 73 so I'm not even trying. (Being CLP chair and on the Borough exec is a compromise.)

    Anecdotally, when I was one of Corbyn's constituents and had half an hour with him talking about diverse topics, I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords. He looked suitably nonplussed and we hastily moved on.
    As an MP, I was well aware that there were plenty of subjects about which I knew nothing... An opinion/recommendation from respected experts in the Lords would have been useful.

    I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords

    Anyone else see a contradiction here?
    No.
    Nick was proposing that the Lords initiate legislation - a task for individual experts - but have no effective vote when it comes to passing it into law. So no contradiction at all, since Nick has expertise on particular subjects, on which he'd weigh in, but would have no effective vote on stuff he knew nothing about.

    I don't know if I like his proposal, but it is at least consistent.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,380
    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Carnyx said:

    DavidL said:

    Off-topic:

    I've just had an absolutely lovely run. It was not too hot this morning, and mist was rising from the grass after the overnight rain. Scores of rabbits were gambolling about, and a deer nonchalantly looked up as I jogged past.

    In these summer mornings, it is worth getting up early and going into the local countryside - or even a local park - just before and/or after dawn, to see nature at its freshest. One of life's free joys.

    We've not had any rabbits around here for over a year now as a virus took them all out. But it is a rare walk in the woods (my knees are not really up for running these days) where I don't see a deer, mainly roe but the odd red.
    Ditto here. Saw a young roe fawn in the long grass of a meadow within sight of houses the other day.
    Their numbers are seriously up, they must be causing significant losses to farmers.

    Talking of which, this story seems to be getting a surprising amount of attention: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-65976472.amp

    The Scottish government has stopped the use of a chemical for controlling bracken and, indirectly ticks. The son of friends of ours lost 2 years of his life to Lymes disease, having to defer his University place. It is a deeply pernicious disease and he is still not fully over it.
    Quite righ about deer; I do my best by buying and eating local venison, woke as it is.

    Ticks aren't particularly specific to bracken, though - they're quite happy to use long grass, heather, and so on as we know ourselves (even though we never wear shorts on country walks, tuck in our socks, etc). The worst problem is the small instars (immature ones) which are difficult to spot. We have a couple of cheap plastic tick extractors stashed in our rucksacks.

    eg https://www.tiso.com/s:tick/?search=tick

    Entirely agree re Lyme disease aka borreliosis - the cocnentric rash is pretty diagnostic but unforetunately not always present.

    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lyme-disease/
    The idea that farmers/landowners want to control bracken and thereby ticks out of concern for walkers on their land is most entertaining.
    Tbf it seems to be SCons pushing this particular line. How many of them are farmers and/or landowners I couldn’t say.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,392
    148grss said:

    tlg86 said:

    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    US Navy did hear an implosion event at the time of the submersible loss (if you can read through Cameron’s ego):

    Titanic director James Cameron: 'OceanGate were warned'
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65994707

    So it sounds as the though the real reason they didn’t confirm the loss at once is they were waiting for an ROV to confirm it.

    Let me repost the vid on this I highlighted at 6am.

    A good one from Sub Brief looking at the submersible that imploded:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dka29FSZac
    The CEO didn't want 50-year old white guys. So it's a woke tragedy as well as a people have too much money tragedy.

    Everything about it sounds horrific. The comparisons with NASA and Apollo 1 are well made. NASA's first question on everything is "and how does it fail?"
    That's nothing about wokery - that's about the "tech disruptor" mindset; "we don't need specialists or experts to build a submarine, we're going to be pioneers and do it ourselves"

    Which probably explains the game boy controller used on it.


  • Options
    .
    Nigelb said:

    Farooq said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    @Fishing is correct.

    Age is not of itself a bar, especially in the US where the work hard ethos is part of the American dream and I think @MikeSmithson is misreading the cultural differences.

    In the US hard work is part of the American Dream. If you're fit and able you work on, and on. As I've posted before, there have been several nonagenarian elected Senators, and there are currently two serving senators who are over 89 years old. The oldest serving senator was Strom Thurmond who crossed the 100 mark whilst still in office. This is something unthinkable in the UK and alien to our culture where 'retirement' is the dream, as opposed to working hard and making your way until the end. For a fictional portrayal of this point, see Brian Cox's character in Succession.

    Strom Thurmond was an extraordinary politician. He switched from Democrat to Republican. He conducted the longest ever single filibuster by a lone senator at 24 hours and 18 minutes in length. He was also a staunch opponent of civil rights legislation.

    And guess who delivered the eulogy at both Strom Thurmond's funeral and burial plot? Yep ... one Joe Biden.

    So I wouldn't bank any of your money on Joe standing down. If he remains sufficiently agile mentally and physically then he will erm ... run.

    That may be true for a few super rich and elite politician Americans, the average American certainly wants to retire by mid 60s
    That's a slightly different point. "I want to retire before I'm old" is not incompatible with "I rdespect and will vote for people willing to carry on indefinitely".

    I think we overdo the ageism a bit in British politics. Speaking personally I'd be delighted to have another term and immodestly think I'd be better than some, but it's really unlikely to happen at age 73 so I'm not even trying. (Being CLP chair and on the Borough exec is a compromise.)

    Anecdotally, when I was one of Corbyn's constituents and had half an hour with him talking about diverse topics, I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords. He looked suitably nonplussed and we hastily moved on.
    As an MP, I was well aware that there were plenty of subjects about which I knew nothing... An opinion/recommendation from respected experts in the Lords would have been useful.

    I said I wouldn't be a bad hard-working loyalist if he wanted to stick me in the Lords

    Anyone else see a contradiction here?
    No.
    Nick was proposing that the Lords initiate legislation - a task for individual experts - but have no effective vote when it comes to passing it into law. So no contradiction at all, since Nick has expertise on particular subjects, on which he'd weigh in, but would have no effective vote on stuff he knew nothing about.

    I don't know if I like his proposal, but it is at least consistent.
    "Loyalist" does not mean no effective vote it means voting on party political lines, which is the contradiction.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,057
    The House of Representatives is certainly less dignified than the Senate.

    Greene calls Boebert a ‘little b- – – -‘ as tensions boil over on House floor
    https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4062391-greene-calls-boebert-a-little-b-as-tensions-boil-over-on-house-floor/
This discussion has been closed.