Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Not sure the mass transportation of Jews won't be seen as an ignoble measure.
Israel is almost exactly the same size as Wales. I know this because a friend once looked at the board for a wargame of the Six Days war, and said, looks about the size of Wales. And he was right.
Yep,
Wales = 21,218 sq. km. (8,192 sq. miles) Israel = 20,770 sq. km. (8,019 sq. miles), on its 1967 borders.
Excuse me, were you not paying attention? Our expert on international law, Bart, has explained that the 1967 borders don’t apply.
Does that mean we have to give them a few counties of England too, or would Scotland suffice?
Bart argues that the Oslo accords were willing to discuss the border, ergo the current border does not exist. The Good Friday Agreement says we’re willing to discuss the border in Ireland, ergo the current UK border doesn’t exist either.
Except the status quo is that there is a current border in Ireland, and there's not one in Israel.
Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border.
Israel and Egypt and Jordan had defined borders, but Egypt and Jordan have relinquished the land they lost in a defensive war that Israel won. Egypt recognised that by peace treaty, Jordan did not but has relinquished their claim anyway.
So a hypothetical potential future Palestinian state may emerge, out of land Egypt and Jordan used to own, but there is not one today nor is there any border today.
To quote Prof Julius Stone: Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.
"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border."
It overlaps, in nationality of the inhabitants, and in EU status. That's not a simple border, but a very partial one.
So you can throw that right out as an argument.
Yes but that overlap is accepted and defined, so no we can't.
There is no defined border with regards to Israel/Palestine. There can't be, since there never was a Palestine and Egypt and Jordan gave the land up to Israel, not Palestine.
Palestine declared independence in 1988 (after Jordan and Egypt gave up their claims to the land), and 138 out of 193 UN members currently recognise it.
Which is utterly irrelevant since the UN is not a democracy, and the 138 members primarily includes nations which are not proper democracies either.
The UNSC does not recognise it, nor does the UK, USA or almost all of the democratic world either.
India recognises it, so does Sweden. Not exactly dictatorships.
No, they're the exceptions that prove the rule.
The rest of the democratic world does not, and as far as the UN goes its only the UNSC that is relevant, not the UNGA, and the UNSC does not recognise it so that's the end of the matter.
Using the expression "they're the exceptions that prove the rule" is discrediting your argument. Because it means the opposite of what you think it means. 'Prove' is in the meaning of 'test', and in the context of the expression, it means 'test and find wanting'. The common modern interpretation, which you are following, is so much self-contradictory nonsense.
That's my world turned upside down. I've been working off an interpretation gleaned from PB no less maybe even OGH Jr (please correct me @rcs1000) that the saying meant that because the exception is so abnormal as to be remarked upon that it shows in general the rule holds.
I suppose sayings change. It irritates me greatly that the accepted meaning of "carrot and stick" is now to be harsh or lenient whereas I grew up thinking it meant if you suggest something desirable in front of someone they will move towards that position (without ever reaching it).
No, the carrot is on a stick. The stick is used like a horse crop. SO you have both a pull and a push effect.
The German equivalent is "doughnut* and whip" which makes the two meanings clear.
*actually Zuckerbrot= "sugar bread", but I think doughnut is a good translation
What are you talking about. The carrot is dangling from a rope at the end of a stick which is held in front of the donkey's head so the donkey walks forward thinking it's going to reach the carrot. Which it never does.
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
It would have been if they'd carried on making and drinking Old Mull whisky which could strip paint at 100yds.
Who’da thought it, Gothenburg is a really nice place.
People seem happy and friendly, great cafes, a wonderful food market, clean, tidy, infrastructure that works.
Off to Oslo tomorrow.
I went to Gothenburg in the mid 80s on the ferry over from Helsingor. Only had a day there and signed up for the afternoon walking tour - there are two, one in German and one in English. I was the only one on the English tour so the guide and I had an enjoyable discussion of Sweden's history and after the tour went looking for a small souvenir.
I found a small mug for hot chocolate with the Swedish flag on it and I thought "something typically Swedish". It was only when I got home I discovered it was made in East Germany. I have it to this time as a little relic of both my day in Sweden and the German Democratic Republic.
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
Difficult to see how it could be seriously mooted in the early 20th century. The Tories would be furious at the very notion of displacing the huntin', shootin' and fishin' types, and the Libs would be even more furious at displacing the inhabitants.
I wondered if Topping is misrmemebering some permutation of the Templar Treasure from Jerusalem that was said to end up in Rosslyn after a Mull landfall, but I am reminded of this little local enterprise and think he has better sense than to do so -
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
It would have been if they'd carried on making and drinking Old Mull whisky which could strip paint at 100yds.
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
I'm convinced that speed humps and the ability to pavement park at will are part of the reason for SUV popularity.
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
The new road my new estate is off has those stupid tiny road humps on them, absolutely do drive down the road trying to dodge them as a result. Two can be dodged by using the two different bus stops they're next to.
The only thing those humps do is it me want to go and buy an SUV.
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
But that doesn't work in your case. You flatly stated something. And when you were shown it didn't apply, you said that oh, after all maybe there are exceptions.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
I'm convinced that speed humps and the ability to pavement park at will are part of the reason for SUV popularity.
Hallelujah!
We can agree on something related to cars!
I don't have an SUV, I don't want one, but speed humps make them much more appealing than they should be. They're a stupid, stupid idea, especially when installed on 30mph roads.
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
It would have been if they'd carried on making and drinking Old Mull whisky which could strip paint at 100yds.
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
But that doesn't work in your case. You flatly stated something. And when you were shown it didn't apply, you said that oh, after all maybe there are exceptions.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
The new road my new estate is off has those stupid tiny road humps on them, absolutely do drive down the road trying to dodge them as a result. Two can be dodged by using the two different bus stops they're next to.
The only thing those humps do is it me want to go and buy an SUV.
To be fair, they sound like they are stopping you barreling down the road at 40mph, which means they are working.
The reason for the small ones is to allow buses and fire engines to travel around with smacking the passengers off the roof.
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
That sounds a bit fascist.
Geez, don't be ridiculous.
I agree with Leon on this. The Remain campaign cast Britain as unable to survive independent from the EU, and so people would just have to lump it. But there's so much that's great about being in the EU and Europe, and so that should have been celebrated.
It had a 'protect our beautiful home from the foreign hordes' vibe. Not keen.
Re the serious point I don't buy the idea that Remain lost because of a shit campaign. It's bollox imo. I think they lost because the underlying mood of the country was Out and the Leave campaign pushed all the right buttons to convert that into the win. If Remain had been relentlessly positive and idealistic about Europe it wouldn't have been as close as 48/52. They fought a good losing campaign. They did well to not lose by more.
The one thing I think they could have done, which they didn't, is go dirty and personal on the charlatans on the Leave side. Cameron said no to that for party management purposes. That might have made a difference imo. So, not more positive but more negative is what might have worked. That's my considered opinion on this one. But, you know, it's gone now isn't it. Best to concentrate on damage limitation plus reminding Leavers it's their fault and no-one else's.
But they did do that. AIR, they were openly pretty personal about the main characters on the leave side. I remember being quite surprised at how nasty Amber Rudd, for example, was being.
The "not safe in taxis" thing?
It was a harsh barb, but pretty accurate, both literally and metaphorically (Boris did end up taking us all for a ride...)
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
The new road my new estate is off has those stupid tiny road humps on them, absolutely do drive down the road trying to dodge them as a result. Two can be dodged by using the two different bus stops they're next to.
The only thing those humps do is it me want to go and buy an SUV.
AIUI you should drive so that your tyres go directly over the middle of the hump to avoid cocking up your tracking.
Not sure the mass transportation of Jews won't be seen as an ignoble measure.
Israel is almost exactly the same size as Wales. I know this because a friend once looked at the board for a wargame of the Six Days war, and said, looks about the size of Wales. And he was right.
Yep,
Wales = 21,218 sq. km. (8,192 sq. miles) Israel = 20,770 sq. km. (8,019 sq. miles), on its 1967 borders.
Excuse me, were you not paying attention? Our expert on international law, Bart, has explained that the 1967 borders don’t apply.
Does that mean we have to give them a few counties of England too, or would Scotland suffice?
Bart argues that the Oslo accords were willing to discuss the border, ergo the current border does not exist. The Good Friday Agreement says we’re willing to discuss the border in Ireland, ergo the current UK border doesn’t exist either.
Except the status quo is that there is a current border in Ireland, and there's not one in Israel.
Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border.
Israel and Egypt and Jordan had defined borders, but Egypt and Jordan have relinquished the land they lost in a defensive war that Israel won. Egypt recognised that by peace treaty, Jordan did not but has relinquished their claim anyway.
So a hypothetical potential future Palestinian state may emerge, out of land Egypt and Jordan used to own, but there is not one today nor is there any border today.
To quote Prof Julius Stone: Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.
"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border."
It overlaps, in nationality of the inhabitants, and in EU status. That's not a simple border, but a very partial one.
So you can throw that right out as an argument.
Yes but that overlap is accepted and defined, so no we can't.
There is no defined border with regards to Israel/Palestine. There can't be, since there never was a Palestine and Egypt and Jordan gave the land up to Israel, not Palestine.
Palestine declared independence in 1988 (after Jordan and Egypt gave up their claims to the land), and 138 out of 193 UN members currently recognise it.
Which is utterly irrelevant since the UN is not a democracy, and the 138 members primarily includes nations which are not proper democracies either.
The UNSC does not recognise it, nor does the UK, USA or almost all of the democratic world either.
India recognises it, so does Sweden. Not exactly dictatorships.
No, they're the exceptions that prove the rule.
The rest of the democratic world does not, and as far as the UN goes its only the UNSC that is relevant, not the UNGA, and the UNSC does not recognise it so that's the end of the matter.
Using the expression "they're the exceptions that prove the rule" is discrediting your argument. Because it means the opposite of what you think it means. 'Prove' is in the meaning of 'test', and in the context of the expression, it means 'test and find wanting'. The common modern interpretation, which you are following, is so much self-contradictory nonsense.
That's my world turned upside down. I've been working off an interpretation gleaned from PB no less maybe even OGH Jr (please correct me @rcs1000) that the saying meant that because the exception is so abnormal as to be remarked upon that it shows in general the rule holds.
I suppose sayings change. It irritates me greatly that the accepted meaning of "carrot and stick" is now to be harsh or lenient whereas I grew up thinking it meant if you suggest something desirable in front of someone they will move towards that position (without ever reaching it).
Yes, my unserstanding is that of Carynx - 'proves' in this case pretty much means 'disprove'.
I don't think it's as strong as disprove, but it's certainly 'tests' - 'puts under strain'.
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
I'm convinced that speed humps and the ability to pavement park at will are part of the reason for SUV popularity.
Hallelujah!
We can agree on something related to cars!
I don't have an SUV, I don't want one, but speed humps make them much more appealing than they should be. They're a stupid, stupid idea, especially when installed on 30mph roads.
I'd be keen on a tree-based slalom, as do they do elsewhere in the world. Beautify and pacify.
Not sure the mass transportation of Jews won't be seen as an ignoble measure.
Israel is almost exactly the same size as Wales. I know this because a friend once looked at the board for a wargame of the Six Days war, and said, looks about the size of Wales. And he was right.
Yep,
Wales = 21,218 sq. km. (8,192 sq. miles) Israel = 20,770 sq. km. (8,019 sq. miles), on its 1967 borders.
Excuse me, were you not paying attention? Our expert on international law, Bart, has explained that the 1967 borders don’t apply.
Does that mean we have to give them a few counties of England too, or would Scotland suffice?
Bart argues that the Oslo accords were willing to discuss the border, ergo the current border does not exist. The Good Friday Agreement says we’re willing to discuss the border in Ireland, ergo the current UK border doesn’t exist either.
Except the status quo is that there is a current border in Ireland, and there's not one in Israel.
Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border.
Israel and Egypt and Jordan had defined borders, but Egypt and Jordan have relinquished the land they lost in a defensive war that Israel won. Egypt recognised that by peace treaty, Jordan did not but has relinquished their claim anyway.
So a hypothetical potential future Palestinian state may emerge, out of land Egypt and Jordan used to own, but there is not one today nor is there any border today.
To quote Prof Julius Stone: Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.
"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border."
It overlaps, in nationality of the inhabitants, and in EU status. That's not a simple border, but a very partial one.
So you can throw that right out as an argument.
Yes but that overlap is accepted and defined, so no we can't.
There is no defined border with regards to Israel/Palestine. There can't be, since there never was a Palestine and Egypt and Jordan gave the land up to Israel, not Palestine.
Palestine declared independence in 1988 (after Jordan and Egypt gave up their claims to the land), and 138 out of 193 UN members currently recognise it.
Which is utterly irrelevant since the UN is not a democracy, and the 138 members primarily includes nations which are not proper democracies either.
The UNSC does not recognise it, nor does the UK, USA or almost all of the democratic world either.
India recognises it, so does Sweden. Not exactly dictatorships.
No, they're the exceptions that prove the rule.
The rest of the democratic world does not, and as far as the UN goes its only the UNSC that is relevant, not the UNGA, and the UNSC does not recognise it so that's the end of the matter.
Using the expression "they're the exceptions that prove the rule" is discrediting your argument. Because it means the opposite of what you think it means. 'Prove' is in the meaning of 'test', and in the context of the expression, it means 'test and find wanting'. The common modern interpretation, which you are following, is so much self-contradictory nonsense.
That's my world turned upside down. I've been working off an interpretation gleaned from PB no less maybe even OGH Jr (please correct me @rcs1000) that the saying meant that because the exception is so abnormal as to be remarked upon that it shows in general the rule holds.
I suppose sayings change. It irritates me greatly that the accepted meaning of "carrot and stick" is now to be harsh or lenient whereas I grew up thinking it meant if you suggest something desirable in front of someone they will move towards that position (without ever reaching it).
Yes, my unserstanding is that of Carynx - 'proves' in this case pretty much means 'disprove'.
I don't think it's as strong as disprove, but it's certainly 'tests' - 'puts under strain'.
Indeed: that's why a "proving ground" is a "testing ground". You test the thing, and if it passes you've proved it fit for purpose.
Not sure the mass transportation of Jews won't be seen as an ignoble measure.
Israel is almost exactly the same size as Wales. I know this because a friend once looked at the board for a wargame of the Six Days war, and said, looks about the size of Wales. And he was right.
Yep,
Wales = 21,218 sq. km. (8,192 sq. miles) Israel = 20,770 sq. km. (8,019 sq. miles), on its 1967 borders.
Excuse me, were you not paying attention? Our expert on international law, Bart, has explained that the 1967 borders don’t apply.
Does that mean we have to give them a few counties of England too, or would Scotland suffice?
Bart argues that the Oslo accords were willing to discuss the border, ergo the current border does not exist. The Good Friday Agreement says we’re willing to discuss the border in Ireland, ergo the current UK border doesn’t exist either.
Except the status quo is that there is a current border in Ireland, and there's not one in Israel.
Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border.
Israel and Egypt and Jordan had defined borders, but Egypt and Jordan have relinquished the land they lost in a defensive war that Israel won. Egypt recognised that by peace treaty, Jordan did not but has relinquished their claim anyway.
So a hypothetical potential future Palestinian state may emerge, out of land Egypt and Jordan used to own, but there is not one today nor is there any border today.
To quote Prof Julius Stone: Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.
"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border."
It overlaps, in nationality of the inhabitants, and in EU status. That's not a simple border, but a very partial one.
So you can throw that right out as an argument.
Yes but that overlap is accepted and defined, so no we can't.
There is no defined border with regards to Israel/Palestine. There can't be, since there never was a Palestine and Egypt and Jordan gave the land up to Israel, not Palestine.
Palestine declared independence in 1988 (after Jordan and Egypt gave up their claims to the land), and 138 out of 193 UN members currently recognise it.
Which is utterly irrelevant since the UN is not a democracy, and the 138 members primarily includes nations which are not proper democracies either.
The UNSC does not recognise it, nor does the UK, USA or almost all of the democratic world either.
India recognises it, so does Sweden. Not exactly dictatorships.
No, they're the exceptions that prove the rule.
The rest of the democratic world does not, and as far as the UN goes its only the UNSC that is relevant, not the UNGA, and the UNSC does not recognise it so that's the end of the matter.
Using the expression "they're the exceptions that prove the rule" is discrediting your argument. Because it means the opposite of what you think it means. 'Prove' is in the meaning of 'test', and in the context of the expression, it means 'test and find wanting'. The common modern interpretation, which you are following, is so much self-contradictory nonsense.
That's my world turned upside down. I've been working off an interpretation gleaned from PB no less maybe even OGH Jr (please correct me @rcs1000) that the saying meant that because the exception is so abnormal as to be remarked upon that it shows in general the rule holds.
I suppose sayings change. It irritates me greatly that the accepted meaning of "carrot and stick" is now to be harsh or lenient whereas I grew up thinking it meant if you suggest something desirable in front of someone they will move towards that position (without ever reaching it).
Yes, my unserstanding is that of Carynx - 'proves' in this case pretty much means 'disprove'.
I don't think it's as strong as disprove, but it's certainly 'tests' - 'puts under strain'.
Indeed: that's why a "proving ground" is a "testing ground". You test the thing, and if it passes you've proved it fit for purpose.
As an aside, any attempt to define country as "place that is recognized by democracies" has to deal with the edge case of Taiwan. Because that is (a) a country; and (b) recognized by basically no-one.
Have we done the Ilkley referendum results. I don't feel they'd be atypical for this sort of proposal and feed into the wider ULEZ, cut the green crap agenda, though I'll defer to @SandyRentool on whether there was anything particular that wouldn't apply elsewhere:
Ilkley Parish Poll Election: Turnout: 4148, 34.7%
Combined town wide 20 limit and speed humps: 10.7% of votes cast in favour
A town wide road hump sounds very wide to me. I am not a road planner but they are normally a bit less than a cars width instead.
Road humps savagely penalise people in small cars. They also, in the version with gaps, have people swerving out of their “line” to reduce the effect. Which is massively dangerous for everyone. But especially cyclists.
Aside from that….
The new road my new estate is off has those stupid tiny road humps on them, absolutely do drive down the road trying to dodge them as a result. Two can be dodged by using the two different bus stops they're next to.
The only thing those humps do is it me want to go and buy an SUV.
AIUI you should drive so that your tyres go directly over the middle of the hump to avoid cocking up your tracking.
Three months of daily driving on British roads will fuck the alignment anyway. It's way out, by my standards, on almost every car I buy.
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
It would have been if they'd carried on making and drinking Old Mull whisky which could strip paint at 100yds.
Well, if you will drink it straight from the still ... no, seriously, I'm just wondering how you could be drinking it from the island. A further check confirms it is produced by a company based in Grangemouth, which is much better known for being on the upper reaches of the Firth of Forth. I'm having some difficulty working out what percentage of the modern blend comes from Mull, as the web page seems quite carefully worded, but if the whisky has been continously available whereas the Tobermory/Ledaig distillery was u/s for much of the time since 1932 ...
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
But that doesn't work in your case. You flatly stated something. And when you were shown it didn't apply, you said that oh, after all maybe there are exceptions.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
Not sure the mass transportation of Jews won't be seen as an ignoble measure.
Israel is almost exactly the same size as Wales. I know this because a friend once looked at the board for a wargame of the Six Days war, and said, looks about the size of Wales. And he was right.
Yep,
Wales = 21,218 sq. km. (8,192 sq. miles) Israel = 20,770 sq. km. (8,019 sq. miles), on its 1967 borders.
Excuse me, were you not paying attention? Our expert on international law, Bart, has explained that the 1967 borders don’t apply.
Does that mean we have to give them a few counties of England too, or would Scotland suffice?
Bart argues that the Oslo accords were willing to discuss the border, ergo the current border does not exist. The Good Friday Agreement says we’re willing to discuss the border in Ireland, ergo the current UK border doesn’t exist either.
Except the status quo is that there is a current border in Ireland, and there's not one in Israel.
Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border.
Israel and Egypt and Jordan had defined borders, but Egypt and Jordan have relinquished the land they lost in a defensive war that Israel won. Egypt recognised that by peace treaty, Jordan did not but has relinquished their claim anyway.
So a hypothetical potential future Palestinian state may emerge, out of land Egypt and Jordan used to own, but there is not one today nor is there any border today.
To quote Prof Julius Stone: Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.
"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border."
It overlaps, in nationality of the inhabitants, and in EU status. That's not a simple border, but a very partial one.
So you can throw that right out as an argument.
Yes but that overlap is accepted and defined, so no we can't.
There is no defined border with regards to Israel/Palestine. There can't be, since there never was a Palestine and Egypt and Jordan gave the land up to Israel, not Palestine.
Palestine declared independence in 1988 (after Jordan and Egypt gave up their claims to the land), and 138 out of 193 UN members currently recognise it.
Which is utterly irrelevant since the UN is not a democracy, and the 138 members primarily includes nations which are not proper democracies either.
The UNSC does not recognise it, nor does the UK, USA or almost all of the democratic world either.
India recognises it, so does Sweden. Not exactly dictatorships.
No, they're the exceptions that prove the rule.
The rest of the democratic world does not, and as far as the UN goes its only the UNSC that is relevant, not the UNGA, and the UNSC does not recognise it so that's the end of the matter.
Using the expression "they're the exceptions that prove the rule" is discrediting your argument. Because it means the opposite of what you think it means. 'Prove' is in the meaning of 'test', and in the context of the expression, it means 'test and find wanting'. The common modern interpretation, which you are following, is so much self-contradictory nonsense.
That's my world turned upside down. I've been working off an interpretation gleaned from PB no less maybe even OGH Jr (please correct me @rcs1000) that the saying meant that because the exception is so abnormal as to be remarked upon that it shows in general the rule holds.
I suppose sayings change. It irritates me greatly that the accepted meaning of "carrot and stick" is now to be harsh or lenient whereas I grew up thinking it meant if you suggest something desirable in front of someone they will move towards that position (without ever reaching it).
Yes, my unserstanding is that of Carynx - 'proves' in this case pretty much means 'disprove'.
I don't think it's as strong as disprove, but it's certainly 'tests' - 'puts under strain'.
Indeed: that's why a "proving ground" is a "testing ground". You test the thing, and if it passes you've proved it fit for purpose.
Until someone changes a form, then presses the BACK button in their browser, then presses SAVE. Only on Chrome on Windows 10,
Not sure the mass transportation of Jews won't be seen as an ignoble measure.
Israel is almost exactly the same size as Wales. I know this because a friend once looked at the board for a wargame of the Six Days war, and said, looks about the size of Wales. And he was right.
Yep,
Wales = 21,218 sq. km. (8,192 sq. miles) Israel = 20,770 sq. km. (8,019 sq. miles), on its 1967 borders.
Excuse me, were you not paying attention? Our expert on international law, Bart, has explained that the 1967 borders don’t apply.
Does that mean we have to give them a few counties of England too, or would Scotland suffice?
Bart argues that the Oslo accords were willing to discuss the border, ergo the current border does not exist. The Good Friday Agreement says we’re willing to discuss the border in Ireland, ergo the current UK border doesn’t exist either.
Except the status quo is that there is a current border in Ireland, and there's not one in Israel.
Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border.
Israel and Egypt and Jordan had defined borders, but Egypt and Jordan have relinquished the land they lost in a defensive war that Israel won. Egypt recognised that by peace treaty, Jordan did not but has relinquished their claim anyway.
So a hypothetical potential future Palestinian state may emerge, out of land Egypt and Jordan used to own, but there is not one today nor is there any border today.
To quote Prof Julius Stone: Israel's presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.
"Ireland and the United Kingdom have a defined border."
It overlaps, in nationality of the inhabitants, and in EU status. That's not a simple border, but a very partial one.
So you can throw that right out as an argument.
Yes but that overlap is accepted and defined, so no we can't.
There is no defined border with regards to Israel/Palestine. There can't be, since there never was a Palestine and Egypt and Jordan gave the land up to Israel, not Palestine.
Palestine declared independence in 1988 (after Jordan and Egypt gave up their claims to the land), and 138 out of 193 UN members currently recognise it.
Which is utterly irrelevant since the UN is not a democracy, and the 138 members primarily includes nations which are not proper democracies either.
The UNSC does not recognise it, nor does the UK, USA or almost all of the democratic world either.
India recognises it, so does Sweden. Not exactly dictatorships.
No, they're the exceptions that prove the rule.
The rest of the democratic world does not, and as far as the UN goes its only the UNSC that is relevant, not the UNGA, and the UNSC does not recognise it so that's the end of the matter.
Using the expression "they're the exceptions that prove the rule" is discrediting your argument. Because it means the opposite of what you think it means. 'Prove' is in the meaning of 'test', and in the context of the expression, it means 'test and find wanting'. The common modern interpretation, which you are following, is so much self-contradictory nonsense.
That's my world turned upside down. I've been working off an interpretation gleaned from PB no less maybe even OGH Jr (please correct me @rcs1000) that the saying meant that because the exception is so abnormal as to be remarked upon that it shows in general the rule holds.
I suppose sayings change. It irritates me greatly that the accepted meaning of "carrot and stick" is now to be harsh or lenient whereas I grew up thinking it meant if you suggest something desirable in front of someone they will move towards that position (without ever reaching it).
Yes, my unserstanding is that of Carynx - 'proves' in this case pretty much means 'disprove'.
I don't think it's as strong as disprove, but it's certainly 'tests' - 'puts under strain'.
Indeed: that's why a "proving ground" is a "testing ground". You test the thing, and if it passes you've proved it fit for purpose.
Test
Anyone who's been through Brum New Street on the train has a good chance of seeing the Proof House - can't recall which line, though.
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
It would have been if they'd carried on making and drinking Old Mull whisky which could strip paint at 100yds.
Well, if you will drink it straight from the still ... no, seriously, I'm just wondering how you could be drinking it from the island. A further check confirms it is produced by a company based in Grangemouth, which is much better known for being on the upper reaches of the Firth of Forth. I'm having some difficulty working out what percentage of the modern blend comes from Mull, as the web page seems quite carefully worded, but if the whisky has been continously available whereas the Tobermory/Ledaig distillery was u/s for much of the time since 1932 ...
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
But that doesn't work in your case. You flatly stated something. And when you were shown it didn't apply, you said that oh, after all maybe there are exceptions.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
I did say it in advance, at 9:21pm.
But youi were positively claiming they helped youjr argument.
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
That sounds a bit fascist.
Geez, don't be ridiculous.
I agree with Leon on this. The Remain campaign cast Britain as unable to survive independent from the EU, and so people would just have to lump it. But there's so much that's great about being in the EU and Europe, and so that should have been celebrated.
It had a 'protect our beautiful home from the foreign hordes' vibe. Not keen.
Re the serious point I don't buy the idea that Remain lost because of a shit campaign. It's bollox imo. I think they lost because the underlying mood of the country was Out and the Leave campaign pushed all the right buttons to convert that into the win. If Remain had been relentlessly positive and idealistic about Europe it wouldn't have been as close as 48/52. They fought a good losing campaign. They did well to not lose by more.
The one thing I think they could have done, which they didn't, is go dirty and personal on the charlatans on the Leave side. Cameron said no to that for party management purposes. That might have made a difference imo. So, not more positive but more negative is what might have worked. That's my considered opinion on this one. But, you know, it's gone now isn't it. Best to concentrate on damage limitation plus reminding Leavers it's their fault and no-one else's.
But they did do that. AIR, they were openly pretty personal about the main characters on the leave side. I remember being quite surprised at how nasty Amber Rudd, for example, was being.
Also, I agree with Leon: the Remain campaign was astonishingly shit. You have to give people a reason to vote for you - you can't just abuse and threaten them. It was the Hillary Clinton of British political campaigns.
C'mon that's nonsense. Britain Stronger In Europe. Nothing abusive about that. Nor about stressing the costs and the risks of leaving. I await the first Leaver to say and mean it (ie not Leon) that they would have voted Remain if the Remain campaign had been misty eyed and idealistic about Europe. Until then I'll continue to think it's gaslighting.
The Madagascar proposal is implemented in (one of the timelines) in |Christopher Priest's novel 'The Separation.' This is very much a background item, but it is indicated that the Jewish state established there is, in the present day, experiencing problems from Madagascan natives resisting the expropriation of their homeland.
Alaska is the site of a hypothetical Jewish state in Michael Chabon's v. good hard boiled novel Yiddish Policeman’s Union.
Am I dreaming that Mull was once mooted as a possible Jewish homeland. Or am I getting my displaced peoples mixed up.
There are quite a few uninhabited Scottish islands, but Mull is not one of them
It would have been if they'd carried on making and drinking Old Mull whisky which could strip paint at 100yds.
Well, if you will drink it straight from the still ... no, seriously, I'm just wondering how you could be drinking it from the island. A further check confirms it is produced by a company based in Grangemouth, which is much better known for being on the upper reaches of the Firth of Forth. I'm having some difficulty working out what percentage of the modern blend comes from Mull, as the web page seems quite carefully worded, but if the whisky has been continously available whereas the Tobermory/Ledaig distillery was u/s for much of the time since 1932 ...
We're talking a few years ago now and I'm pretty sure it wasn't a malt. Googling shows me that it was made by Donald Fraser and Co.
Sure it wasn't a malt, but a blend from various places, including (presumably Lowland) grain whisky. Which is why the wording of the website I linked to is interesting when put into context of the history of whisky production on Mull. Maybe they just had a lot of Ledaig malt in stock ...
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
But that doesn't work in your case. You flatly stated something. And when you were shown it didn't apply, you said that oh, after all maybe there are exceptions.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
I did say it in advance, at 9:21pm.
But youi were positively claiming they helped youjr argument.
We seem to be going around in circles?
Yes, I pre-defined the exception (almost all) and when the exception was named I correctly used the expression.
I didn't say afterwards "oh maybe there are exceptions", I said it up front.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 34m “At Oxford city council, where I now sit as an independent, eight of us have left. The reason I quit is because the leader of the Labour party, Keir Starmer, horrifyingly endorsed the collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza”. Another big win for Keir Starmer.
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
That sounds a bit fascist.
Geez, don't be ridiculous.
I agree with Leon on this. The Remain campaign cast Britain as unable to survive independent from the EU, and so people would just have to lump it. But there's so much that's great about being in the EU and Europe, and so that should have been celebrated.
It had a 'protect our beautiful home from the foreign hordes' vibe. Not keen.
Re the serious point I don't buy the idea that Remain lost because of a shit campaign. It's bollox imo. I think they lost because the underlying mood of the country was Out and the Leave campaign pushed all the right buttons to convert that into the win. If Remain had been relentlessly positive and idealistic about Europe it wouldn't have been as close as 48/52. They fought a good losing campaign. They did well to not lose by more.
The one thing I think they could have done, which they didn't, is go dirty and personal on the charlatans on the Leave side. Cameron said no to that for party management purposes. That might have made a difference imo. So, not more positive but more negative is what might have worked. That's my considered opinion on this one. But, you know, it's gone now isn't it. Best to concentrate on damage limitation plus reminding Leavers it's their fault and no-one else's.
But they did do that. AIR, they were openly pretty personal about the main characters on the leave side. I remember being quite surprised at how nasty Amber Rudd, for example, was being.
Also, I agree with Leon: the Remain campaign was astonishingly shit. You have to give people a reason to vote for you - you can't just abuse and threaten them. It was the Hillary Clinton of British political campaigns.
C'mon that's nonsense. Britain Stronger In Europe. Nothing abusive about that. Nor about stressing the costs and the risks of leaving. I await the first Leaver to say and mean it (ie not Leon) that they would have voted Remain if the Remain campaign had been misty eyed and idealistic about Europe. Until then I'll continue to think it's gaslighting.
*cough, cough*
I was a Remainer until the campaign. The lack of a positive campaign for Remain was a part of what got me to change my mind, since I thought that the fear arguments were just BS.
I’m not kidding about Trump as speaker. He may be the only viable candidate capable of winning a majority…
No. Moderate Republicans just need to bring themselves to do a deal with Democrats. Stop running scared of Trump.
They should. But they won’t. They’re frit. And in a stupid system where they need to get reelected every 2 years, you can understand why.
Nobody in the House can command a majority. Trump has already been nominated but almost as a joke. When they keep running out of candidates, watch him be nominated as a threat.
I’m not kidding about Trump as speaker. He may be the only viable candidate capable of winning a majority…
His candidate Jim Jordan couldn't and has dropped out so Trump couldn't either.
Meanwhile a new moderate picked by most of the GOP caucus as their new Speaker candidate has also dropped out after Trump savaged him on social media.
'Former President Donald Trump took to his Truth Social platform shortly after to call him a "Rino" - Republican In Name Only - who "never respected the power of a Trump endorsement or the breadth and scope of Maga - Make America Great Again".
The Israeli govt accuses António Guterres, the Secretary General of the United Nations, of blood libel, and that unless he apologises he should resign immeadiately.
I’m not kidding about Trump as speaker. He may be the only viable candidate capable of winning a majority…
If the USA could just fernangle a position called 'Supreme Overlord of Being Amazing' that gave you free twitter X posts and 'promoted content', and then Elon handed it to Trump in some sort of Bohemian Grove ceremony - the world would probably be 100x better off.
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
That sounds a bit fascist.
Geez, don't be ridiculous.
I agree with Leon on this. The Remain campaign cast Britain as unable to survive independent from the EU, and so people would just have to lump it. But there's so much that's great about being in the EU and Europe, and so that should have been celebrated.
It had a 'protect our beautiful home from the foreign hordes' vibe. Not keen.
Re the serious point I don't buy the idea that Remain lost because of a shit campaign. It's bollox imo. I think they lost because the underlying mood of the country was Out and the Leave campaign pushed all the right buttons to convert that into the win. If Remain had been relentlessly positive and idealistic about Europe it wouldn't have been as close as 48/52. They fought a good losing campaign. They did well to not lose by more.
The one thing I think they could have done, which they didn't, is go dirty and personal on the charlatans on the Leave side. Cameron said no to that for party management purposes. That might have made a difference imo. So, not more positive but more negative is what might have worked. That's my considered opinion on this one. But, you know, it's gone now isn't it. Best to concentrate on damage limitation plus reminding Leavers it's their fault and no-one else's.
But they did do that. AIR, they were openly pretty personal about the main characters on the leave side. I remember being quite surprised at how nasty Amber Rudd, for example, was being.
Also, I agree with Leon: the Remain campaign was astonishingly shit. You have to give people a reason to vote for you - you can't just abuse and threaten them. It was the Hillary Clinton of British political campaigns.
C'mon that's nonsense. Britain Stronger In Europe. Nothing abusive about that. Nor about stressing the costs and the risks of leaving. I await the first Leaver to say and mean it (ie not Leon) that they would have voted Remain if the Remain campaign had been misty eyed and idealistic about Europe. Until then I'll continue to think it's gaslighting.
*cough, cough*
I was a Remainer until the campaign. The lack of a positive campaign for Remain was a part of what got me to change my mind, since I thought that the fear arguments were just BS.
You are ... what's that ancient greek term for it now? ... suet genderbus.
Or should we say the exception that proves the rule.
NYT live blog - Emmer Drops Speaker Bid After Right-Wing Backlash
Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota, the No. 3 House Republican, dropped his bid for speaker on Tuesday hours after securing his divided party’s nomination, after a swift backlash from the right, including former President Donald J. Trump, left his candidacy in shambles.
Mr. Emmer’s abrupt exit signaled that Republicans were as far as ever from breaking a deadlock that has left Congress leaderless and paralyzed for three weeks. It made Mr. Emmer the third Republican this month to be chosen to lead the party, only to have his bid collapse in a seemingly endless cycle of G.O.P. grievances, personality conflicts and ideological rifts.
Republicans have now succeeded in repudiating all three of their top leaders over the past few weeks. The chamber has been frozen for the better part of a month as Republicans feud over who should be in charge, even as wars rage overseas and a government shutdown approaches.
By late Tuesday afternoon, they were back to the drawing board. Republicans were set to huddle behind closed doors for the second evening in a row to hear from potential candidates and nominate a candidate. They were prepared to go to the floor for a vote of the full House if anyone could muster a majority, but it remained unclear if that was possible amid the current strife.
“It’s a pretty sad commentary on governance right now,” said Representative Steve Womack of Arkansas, adding: “The American public cannot be looking at this and having any reasonable confidence that this conference can be governed. It’s sad. I’m sad. I’m heartbroken.”
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
I’m not kidding about Trump as speaker. He may be the only viable candidate capable of winning a majority…
No. Moderate Republicans just need to bring themselves to do a deal with Democrats. Stop running scared of Trump.
Are there not even 5 of their members who are thinking about standing down next term who might as well end their careers spectacularly?
I suppose the problem is they will need a new grift once out of Congress and there's only so many 'former Maga' speaker slots on the media shows that can be filled.
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
That sounds a bit fascist.
Geez, don't be ridiculous.
I agree with Leon on this. The Remain campaign cast Britain as unable to survive independent from the EU, and so people would just have to lump it. But there's so much that's great about being in the EU and Europe, and so that should have been celebrated.
It had a 'protect our beautiful home from the foreign hordes' vibe. Not keen.
Re the serious point I don't buy the idea that Remain lost because of a shit campaign. It's bollox imo. I think they lost because the underlying mood of the country was Out and the Leave campaign pushed all the right buttons to convert that into the win. If Remain had been relentlessly positive and idealistic about Europe it wouldn't have been as close as 48/52. They fought a good losing campaign. They did well to not lose by more.
The one thing I think they could have done, which they didn't, is go dirty and personal on the charlatans on the Leave side. Cameron said no to that for party management purposes. That might have made a difference imo. So, not more positive but more negative is what might have worked. That's my considered opinion on this one. But, you know, it's gone now isn't it. Best to concentrate on damage limitation plus reminding Leavers it's their fault and no-one else's.
But they did do that. AIR, they were openly pretty personal about the main characters on the leave side. I remember being quite surprised at how nasty Amber Rudd, for example, was being.
Also, I agree with Leon: the Remain campaign was astonishingly shit. You have to give people a reason to vote for you - you can't just abuse and threaten them. It was the Hillary Clinton of British political campaigns.
C'mon that's nonsense. Britain Stronger In Europe. Nothing abusive about that. Nor about stressing the costs and the risks of leaving. I await the first Leaver to say and mean it (ie not Leon) that they would have voted Remain if the Remain campaign had been misty eyed and idealistic about Europe. Until then I'll continue to think it's gaslighting.
*cough, cough*
I was a Remainer until the campaign. The lack of a positive campaign for Remain was a part of what got me to change my mind, since I thought that the fear arguments were just BS.
You are ... what's that ancient greek term for it now? ... suet genderbus.
Or should we say the exception that proves the rule.
'Suet Genderbus' is also my drag act name. I claim my £5. That's how this works, right?
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
I don't think it is true at all to say no lessons have been learned on that front, I think it's just parroting a lazy slogan.
Biden, at least, pitches to what was the centre ground. He's not on the extreme progressive wing looking down on the people who had once voted Trump - he won the election in 2020 by winning over enough of those people.
He's bleeding some ground lately on his left flank, in addition to some switching in other areas you probably expect to some degree with an incumbent.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
Actually, that is what Trump and MAGA-have been doing - writing off 40-45% of the electorate.
For failure to get with the program.
As for his opponents, many do as you say . . . but many do not. Certainly NOT Biden.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
Not all of the GOP are idiotic voters, just unfortunately most GOP voters would rather vote for an idiotic bigot in a GOP lapel than vote for a Democratic.
Bit like Labour and Corbyn. Not all Labour voters were antisemitic morons, but many would rather vote for an antisemitic moron than a Tory.
Hopefully the idiotic bigot loses like he did last time, and the GOP can move on to a better option, like Labour did after their second defeat for Corbyn.
I’m not kidding about Trump as speaker. He may be the only viable candidate capable of winning a majority…
If the USA could just fernangle a position called 'Supreme Overlord of Being Amazing' that gave you free twitter X posts and 'promoted content', and then Elon handed it to Trump in some sort of Bohemian Grove ceremony - the world would probably be 100x better off.
Or, as Douglas Adams put it,
it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem. And so this is the situation we find: a succession of Galactic Presidents who so much enjoy the fun and palaver of being in power that they very rarely notice that they’re not.
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
And a significant disadvantage when it comes to the likelihood of being in jail next year.
Assuming no further delays, which in some of the cases is unlikely to be true, the first criminal trial is in what, March? Even supposing conviction with all the appeals he'll not be in jail.
There is some hope that some numbers of people will be shocked away from supporting him by the trials themselves, but that seems a bit faint to be honest - sure, not everyone is clued in to politics, even as loud as these matters, but if they don't know or don't care about the details of his alleged crimes now, would they engage with it more even then?
Trump has to be worth laying in the Presidential race. His legal problems are stacking up and contrary to what some may think his own party isnt that keen. Despite Biden not exactly being inspiring the level of hostility towards Trump poses a huge threat to his White House chances. There is also every chance his other problems will drag him down. Hes available to lay at reasonable amounts at 2.92 and 2.94 on Betfair.
No matter how I cut it, I just dont think his chances are that strong. Remember we are looking at the POTUS race, notr the nomination.
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
That sounds a bit fascist.
Geez, don't be ridiculous.
I agree with Leon on this. The Remain campaign cast Britain as unable to survive independent from the EU, and so people would just have to lump it. But there's so much that's great about being in the EU and Europe, and so that should have been celebrated.
It had a 'protect our beautiful home from the foreign hordes' vibe. Not keen.
Re the serious point I don't buy the idea that Remain lost because of a shit campaign. It's bollox imo. I think they lost because the underlying mood of the country was Out and the Leave campaign pushed all the right buttons to convert that into the win. If Remain had been relentlessly positive and idealistic about Europe it wouldn't have been as close as 48/52. They fought a good losing campaign. They did well to not lose by more.
The one thing I think they could have done, which they didn't, is go dirty and personal on the charlatans on the Leave side. Cameron said no to that for party management purposes. That might have made a difference imo. So, not more positive but more negative is what might have worked. That's my considered opinion on this one. But, you know, it's gone now isn't it. Best to concentrate on damage limitation plus reminding Leavers it's their fault and no-one else's.
But they did do that. AIR, they were openly pretty personal about the main characters on the leave side. I remember being quite surprised at how nasty Amber Rudd, for example, was being.
Also, I agree with Leon: the Remain campaign was astonishingly shit. You have to give people a reason to vote for you - you can't just abuse and threaten them. It was the Hillary Clinton of British political campaigns.
C'mon that's nonsense. Britain Stronger In Europe. Nothing abusive about that. Nor about stressing the costs and the risks of leaving. I await the first Leaver to say and mean it (ie not Leon) that they would have voted Remain if the Remain campaign had been misty eyed and idealistic about Europe. Until then I'll continue to think it's gaslighting.
The Remain campaign was poor and negative. I said so at the time. It may not have converted many to go with European Idealism, but it may have got some more youngsters to turn out.
This debate is now mostly about finding excuses for Leavers to have voted the way they did, an implicit recognition that both the decision and the principle of referendums is deeply flawed.
I’m not kidding about Trump as speaker. He may be the only viable candidate capable of winning a majority…
If the USA could just fernangle a position called 'Supreme Overlord of Being Amazing' that gave you free twitter X posts and 'promoted content', and then Elon handed it to Trump in some sort of Bohemian Grove ceremony - the world would probably be 100x better off.
It might be my imagination, but I feel like his people have been referring to him as "The President" more in recent months, rather than "President Trump". I wonder if it is an ego thing - it usually is with him - as the latter, the usual 'respectful' american style for former politicians, is not quite as strong as the former, which almost implies he is still in office.
I mean, his professed beliefs about executive privilege applying to him even when he is not the President would make more sense if he at some level still thinks he is.
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
Looking into it, the exception that proves the rule is the historical meaning - that it means when exceptions don't apply, the rule holds. Tests/disproves is a more modern and unusual meaning instead.
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
But that doesn't work in your case. You flatly stated something. And when you were shown it didn't apply, you said that oh, after all maybe there are exceptions.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
I did say it in advance, at 9:21pm.
The US is now rated a “flawed democracy” .
Half its politicians do not accept the concept of peaceful transfer of power, or the legitimacy of elections even after validated by courts and state legislatures, it's awash with dirty money and threats, and bipartisanship is regarded as anathema by everyone except, maybe, Joe Biden and a few other fossils in the Senate. That rating is only going in one direction.
Ours creaks a bit but for now probably maintains a 'full' designation.
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
I can't believe you've just written this, because it's exactly what I've been saying since 2016. During the campaign I kept waiting for the referendum equivalent of a party political broadcast that was going to feature all the magnificent aspects of European culture, and it never happened. All we got instead was a relentless stream of negative reasons to vote Remain.
@habibi_uk 'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
If people don’t believe Biden won and think Trump is a martyr and the subject of a witch-hunt then you simply can’t reason with them .
We’ve heard the “ it was a cry for help from these poor put upon voters “ and we should try and understand them .
Many are not poor or put upon. They’re a cult who will never accept Trump has done anything wrong .
Bill Kristol @BillKristol · 9h New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
Regrettable that no lessons have been learnt since 2016 as to why Trump is so popular with so many people. You can't just write off 40-45% of people as idiotic bigots.
I don't think it is true at all to say no lessons have been learned on that front, I think it's just parroting a lazy slogan.
Biden, at least, pitches to what was the centre ground. He's not on the extreme progressive wing looking down on the people who had once voted Trump - he won the election in 2020 by winning over enough of those people.
He's bleeding some ground lately on his left flank, in addition to some switching in other areas you probably expect to some degree with an incumbent.
Excellent post.
However I fear your being Goodwinned at any moment.
They should have gone straight for the visceral emotional appeal
A sequence of soaring, sublime shots of places like Ortygia, and Venice and Barcelona and the Dolomites and the Matterhorn, and the Hebrides - and magnificent cathedrals like Durham and Milan and Seville and Chartres and York - and cosy English pubs and delightful Parisian bistros and beer halls in Bavaria and tavernas under the plane tree in the Zagoriou mountains - with a sonorous voice over saying THIS, THIS IS YOUR HOME, EUROPE IS YOUR HOME, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AND CIVILISED PLACE ON EARTH - why wouid you leave such a home?? Stay and defend it! Celebrate it! You are the luckiest person in the world: a EUROPEAN
That would have won by a canter
I can't believe you've just written this, because it's exactly what I've been saying since 2016. During the campaign I kept waiting for the referendum equivalent of a party political broadcast that was going to feature all the magnificent aspects of European culture, and it never happened. All we got instead was a relentless stream of negative reasons to vote Remain.
Comments
Aside from that….
Why have we gone to Germany all of a sudden.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule
Interesting example given on the Wiki using English signage to demonstrate the case.
The fact that the sign gives times when parking is forbidden, demonstrates that parking is permitted at the other times.
Special leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m.; "The exception proves the rule" means that this special leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier. The value of this in interpreting statutes is plain.
— Fowler
I found a small mug for hot chocolate with the Swedish flag on it and I thought "something typically Swedish". It was only when I got home I discovered it was made in East Germany. I have it to this time as a little relic of both my day in Sweden and the German Democratic Republic.
I wondered if Topping is misrmemebering some permutation of the Templar Treasure from Jerusalem that was said to end up in Rosslyn after a Mull landfall, but I am reminded of this little local enterprise and think he has better sense than to do so -
https://www.alamy.com/da-vinci-code-horse-manure-for-sale-at-rosslyn-chapel-image7496812.html
The only thing those humps do is it me want to go and buy an SUV.
Come off it. You have to state those *in advance*.
My travel insurance is with EasyJet. I intend to make the bastards pay up.
I shall fail spectacularly but it will be worth it to annoy them,
We can agree on something related to cars!
I don't have an SUV, I don't want one, but speed humps make them much more appealing than they should be. They're a stupid, stupid idea, especially when installed on 30mph roads.
The reason for the small ones is to allow buses and fire engines to travel around with smacking the passengers off the roof.
It was a harsh barb, but pretty accurate, both literally and metaphorically (Boris did end up taking us all for a ride...)
https://www.oldmullwhisky.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobermory_distillery
I'M NOT BITTER!
:: cries ::
And seeing as I'm here :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUMuDWDVd20
"Alice Coltrane - Turiya And Ramakrishna"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Proof_House
The idea was to overload and destroy duff gun barrels. In this case only the non-exceptions were acceptable. The exceptions were destroyed!
Only one European country recognizes the Republic of China rather than the People's Republic of China.
Name it.
How much has he given up ?
I think he should be behind bars.
Or is it Lithuania?
Moderate Republicans just need to bring themselves to do a deal with Democrats. Stop running scared of Trump.
Yes, I pre-defined the exception (almost all) and when the exception was named I correctly used the expression.
I didn't say afterwards "oh maybe there are exceptions", I said it up front.
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
34m
“At Oxford city council, where I now sit as an independent, eight of us have left. The reason I quit is because the leader of the Labour party, Keir Starmer, horrifyingly endorsed the collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza”. Another big win for Keir Starmer.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Taiwan
I was a Remainer until the campaign. The lack of a positive campaign for Remain was a part of what got me to change my mind, since I thought that the fear arguments were just BS.
Nobody in the House can command a majority. Trump has already been nominated but almost as a joke. When they keep running out of candidates, watch him be nominated as a threat.
Vote for Trump. Or else.
Meanwhile a new moderate picked by most of the GOP caucus as their new Speaker candidate has also dropped out after Trump savaged him on social media.
'Former President Donald Trump took to his Truth Social platform shortly after to call him a "Rino" - Republican In Name Only - who "never respected the power of a Trump endorsement or the breadth and scope of Maga - Make America Great Again".
Mr Trump added that he believed it would be "a tragic mistake" for Republicans to back Mr Emmer.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67212260
@BillKristol
·
9h
New poll: Biden and Trump tied 41%-41%.
"Though they're tied, Trump has a significant advantage over Biden when it comes to voter enthusiasm."
I am alarmed.
https://x.com/saulstaniforth/status/1716912470156337527
The Israeli govt accuses António Guterres, the Secretary General of the United Nations, of blood libel, and that unless he apologises he should resign immeadiately.
On the other hand if they don't make a stand what's the point in them being there.
Or should we say the exception that proves the rule.
Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota, the No. 3 House Republican, dropped his bid for speaker on Tuesday hours after securing his divided party’s nomination, after a swift backlash from the right, including former President Donald J. Trump, left his candidacy in shambles.
Mr. Emmer’s abrupt exit signaled that Republicans were as far as ever from breaking a deadlock that has left Congress leaderless and paralyzed for three weeks. It made Mr. Emmer the third Republican this month to be chosen to lead the party, only to have his bid collapse in a seemingly endless cycle of G.O.P. grievances, personality conflicts and ideological rifts.
Republicans have now succeeded in repudiating all three of their top leaders over the past few weeks. The chamber has been frozen for the better part of a month as Republicans feud over who should be in charge, even as wars rage overseas and a government shutdown approaches.
By late Tuesday afternoon, they were back to the drawing board. Republicans were set to huddle behind closed doors for the second evening in a row to hear from potential candidates and nominate a candidate. They were prepared to go to the floor for a vote of the full House if anyone could muster a majority, but it remained unclear if that was possible amid the current strife.
“It’s a pretty sad commentary on governance right now,” said Representative Steve Womack of Arkansas, adding: “The American public cannot be looking at this and having any reasonable confidence that this conference can be governed. It’s sad. I’m sad. I’m heartbroken.”
SSI - Don't cry for him, Arkansas . . .
'The Bradford imam Shahid Ali's Middle East Peace Plan is quite simple. Muslim armies must invade Israel. It is their duty. The "command of jihad".
And Muslims must learn to love death.'
https://x.com/habibi_uk/status/1716882530304209385?s=20
I suppose the problem is they will need a new grift once out of Congress and there's only so many 'former Maga' speaker slots on the media shows that can be filled.
Biden, at least, pitches to what was the centre ground. He's not on the extreme progressive wing looking down on the people who had once voted Trump - he won the election in 2020 by winning over enough of those people.
He's bleeding some ground lately on his left flank, in addition to some switching in other areas you probably expect to some degree with an incumbent.
For failure to get with the program.
As for his opponents, many do as you say . . . but many do not. Certainly NOT Biden.
Don't you mean West Taiwan?
Bit like Labour and Corbyn. Not all Labour voters were antisemitic morons, but many would rather vote for an antisemitic moron than a Tory.
Hopefully the idiotic bigot loses like he did last time, and the GOP can move on to a better option, like Labour did after their second defeat for Corbyn.
it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
And so this is the situation we find: a succession of Galactic Presidents who so much enjoy the fun and palaver of being in power that they very rarely notice that they’re not.
There is some hope that some numbers of people will be shocked away from supporting him by the trials themselves, but that seems a bit faint to be honest - sure, not everyone is clued in to politics, even as loud as these matters, but if they don't know or don't care about the details of his alleged crimes now, would they engage with it more even then?
Trump has to be worth laying in the Presidential race. His legal problems are stacking up and contrary to what some may think his own party isnt that keen. Despite Biden not exactly being inspiring the level of hostility towards Trump poses a huge threat to his White House chances. There is also every chance his other problems will drag him down. Hes available to lay at reasonable amounts at 2.92 and 2.94 on Betfair.
No matter how I cut it, I just dont think his chances are that strong. Remember we are looking at the POTUS race, notr the nomination.
Choose your sides, gentlemen
This debate is now mostly about finding excuses for Leavers to have voted the way they did, an implicit recognition that both the decision and the principle of referendums is deeply flawed.
I mean, his professed beliefs about executive privilege applying to him even when he is not the President would make more sense if he at some level still thinks he is.
Ours creaks a bit but for now probably maintains a 'full' designation.
Some uf them were interviewed on PM this evening. Very probably a minority on both sides, but they exist.
We’ve heard the “ it was a cry for help from these poor put upon voters “ and we should try and understand them .
Many are not poor or put upon. They’re a cult who will never accept Trump has done anything wrong .
However I fear your being Goodwinned at any moment.
https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media/F9JliPXWAAAn5e4.jpg
(I assume these are fake, btw)
GBR: What, like invading Russia in winter-level stupid? No, not really... 😀
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFgjCP6qpfU