It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Surely the SC will vote in favour of the tangerine tyrant?
If Trump is found guilty of insurrection by the Georgia or federal case, possibly with jail time, then it would be in the Republicans' interest if he's disqualified and they can stand Haley or someone instead. The SC will then do what is in the Republicans' interest!
I think there's something of a schism between full on MAGA loons, and very traditional conservatives. Are the latter rallying somewhat around the 'originalist' position? Federalist Society, and so on?
Have there not been certain SCOTUS decisions ruling against Trump, even since he packed it with his chosen appointees?
One slightly Machiavellian reason I have heard suggested why the SCOTUS may not ultimately back Trump is because his declared political intentions / contempt for the rule of law are a direct threat to their position, and they like being Supreme.
The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife
Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.
Simples.
Saint RTD says the new stuff is a complete reboot.
Well yes, but given his committment to not undoing the Timeless Child it may be only nominal.
We shall see. What he says and what he does have often been a little different.
However, although I have all of them on dvd I’m enjoying the original series on IPlayer..
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Can’t think of anyone else
My first thought was Blinken, but Obama would work too - so long as there definitely isn’t any truth to the constant rumours of Michelle standing. Needs to be someone senior enough, but with no self-interest in the contest.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?
Andrew Johnson quite famously. But the circumstances of succeeding to the Presidency post-Civil War as Lincoln's VP, and being widely acknowledged to have made a total horlicks of it, were unusual to say the least.
An underrated factor I think is Trump's mental acuity. It's ignored in a way Biden's often isn't, both because of the assumption Trump's fans don't care when he's been crazy in the past, and because well, even at his sharpest, he sounds completely off his rocker. But if he's under the spotlight and pitiably daft, rather than unhinged but biting, then the reality of Trump becomes a less appealing prospect for some of those who like the idea of him.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the President’s ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
What's the point of whispering in Joe's ear and getting fired immediately?
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
If he doesn't run it will be his decision not due to a hostile challenge. I make it 50/50 and becoming more than 50 (that he doesn't run) if Trump isn't the GOP nominee.
The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife
Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.
Simples.
Saint RTD says the new stuff is a complete reboot.
Well yes, but given his committment to not undoing the Timeless Child it may be only nominal.
We shall see. What he says and what he does have often been a little different.
However, although I have all of them on dvd I’m enjoying the original series on IPlayer..
I've rewatched the Masque of Mandragora (good!) and Black Orchid (not good). Am thinking of a Pertwee four partner next: either the Claws of Axos or Invasion of the Unconvincing Effects. Probably Claws because Jo Grant.
Yesterday we were vaguely discussing how people had lived with animals all their lives etc.,.
This evening Casa Cyclefree has reverted to an even older habit: sitting with our animals round a fire on which we cook - braising steak + veg - very slowly,
All we need now is a storyteller telling tales.
There's that specific Danish word for this sort of 'cold outside but it's warm in here' scenario.
"Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."
I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.
I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.
I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.
What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.
I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
Sorry - of course not Scalia; Alito. Not that there is much difference between their jurisprudence (except that Scalia actually did have some slight unorthodox positions for a GOP judge, whereas Alito is very much a Fox News judge).
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?
None as far as I know.
LBJ was as a result of very poor health - and was a personal decision.
Biden has a lock on the Democratic Party system
I know LBJ was in poor health, but would he really have withdrawn but for Gene McCarthy running him close in New Hampshire and RFK entering the race? I expect the factors combined to a degree - he'd have relished the challenge were he a younger, fitter man. But I don't think you can say it was purely personal.
He died just a couple of days after Nixon's second inauguration, oddly enough. So, in theory, he might have seen out his second term (third, depending on how you see it) had he lived. He'd probably have had to resign through ill health though - he was very weak as 1972 wore on.
The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.
“I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.
"For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.
Trump says no.
Technically he was President for part of 2021.
Yes, who can forget those crazy days. I thought he was going to need tazering to get him out of the building.
It says something that Peru managed to deal with attempted coup by the President better than the US.
And Bolsonaro didn't kick off.
Are you sure?
Well I wasn't with him but he vacated without provoking a civil war, I think?
You think wrong (well, clearly there wasn't a full scale civil war but there wasn't in the US after 6 January either).
There was a violent insurrection by his supporters in January, far larger in scale than in DC in 2021, and the Congressional investigation puts Bolsonaro at the heart of its organisation.
There are, of course, political aspects to the allegations, and he may be less involved than is claimed. He personally made himself scarce, for sure, but a lot of nasty stuff happened in his name even if he has a fig leaf of plausible deniability.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?
None as far as I know.
LBJ was as a result of very poor health - and was a personal decision.
Biden has a lock on the Democratic Party system
I know LBJ was in poor health, but would he really have withdrawn but for Gene McCarthy running him close in New Hampshire and RFK entering the race? I expect the factors combined to a degree - he'd have relished the challenge were he a younger, fitter man. But I don't think you can say it was purely personal.
He died just a couple of days after Nixon's second inauguration, oddly enough. So, in theory, he might have seen out his second term (third, depending on how you see it) had he lived. He'd probably have had to resign through ill health though - he was very weak as 1972 wore on.
His doctors advised him that the strain of the presidency plus his poor health meant it was quite likely he would die in office.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?
None as far as I know.
LBJ was as a result of very poor health - and was a personal decision.
Biden has a lock on the Democratic Party system
I know LBJ was in poor health, but would he really have withdrawn but for Gene McCarthy running him close in New Hampshire and RFK entering the race? I expect the factors combined to a degree - he'd have relished the challenge were he a younger, fitter man. But I don't think you can say it was purely personal.
He died just a couple of days after Nixon's second inauguration, oddly enough. So, in theory, he might have seen out his second term (third, depending on how you see it) had he lived. He'd probably have had to resign through ill health though - he was very weak as 1972 wore on.
His doctors advised him that the strain of the presidency plus his poor health meant it was quite likely he would die in office.
But I rather suspect LBJ would most likely have told his doctors to go f*** themselves up the a** (although he'd have used far cruder language) was he not staring down the barrel of not being the candidate anyway.
An underrated factor I think is Trump's mental acuity. It's ignored in a way Biden's often isn't, both because of the assumption Trump's fans don't care when he's been crazy in the past, and because well, even at his sharpest, he sounds completely off his rocker. But if he's under the spotlight and pitiably daft, rather than unhinged but biting, then the reality of Trump becomes a less appealing prospect for some of those who like the idea of him.
Problem with Trump looking pitiably daft is that to many people Bozo looked pitably daft well before the 2019 election but he still won by a country mile
The state is asking about a 2021 financial statement. Trump says he thinks it's accurate - he hopes so.
“I was so busy in the White House,” he says, adding his focus was on “China” and “Russia”.
"For the record, you weren't president in 2021 were you?" prosecutor Kevin Wallace asks.
Trump says no.
Technically he was President for part of 2021.
Yes, who can forget those crazy days. I thought he was going to need tazering to get him out of the building.
It says something that Peru managed to deal with attempted coup by the President better than the US.
And Bolsonaro didn't kick off.
Are you sure?
Well I wasn't with him but he vacated without provoking a civil war, I think?
You think wrong (well, clearly there wasn't a full scale civil war but there wasn't in the US after 6 January either).
There was a violent insurrection by his supporters in January, far larger in scale than in DC in 2021, and the Congressional investigation puts Bolsonaro at the heart of its organisation.
There are, of course, political aspects to the allegations, and he may be less involved than is claimed. He personally made himself scarce, for sure, but a lot of nasty stuff happened in his name even if he has a fig leaf of plausible deniability.
Ah ok, I clearly wasn't paying enough attention. Thing is, I was expecting him to refuse to go and so that he didnt was a pleasant surprise.
Off topic: I don't know whether this is hopeful: "MOSCOW — Russia’s arrest of Igor Girkin, the former security agent who was convicted this year in absentia by a Dutch court in the 2014 downing of a passenger jet over Ukraine, made clear that Moscow’s protection had come to an end.
"Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."
I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.
I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.
I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.
What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.
I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
Sorry - of course not Scalia; Alito. Not that there is much difference between their jurisprudence (except that Scalia actually did have some slight unorthodox positions for a GOP judge, whereas Alito is very much a Fox News judge).
Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were charmingly close. Their families used to celebrate New Year's Eve together, and the pair used to go shopping and on trips to the opera together quite regularly.
I expect the conservative and liberal justices remain pretty civil overall. But Scalia/Ginsburg was exceptional given they were essentially the extremes of the court, and it speaks to a rather different age.
Given the current make up of the Supreme court I would have thought it was very clear which way things would go.
Any attempt to remove Trump from the ballot would be striked down by a 5-4 or 6-3 margin...
Ay, there's the rub. The "current make up" of the Court. But what if it changes? Thomas is mired in controversy regarding his 'freebies' and is hamstrung by the actions of his wife in pushing Trump's "stolen election" theory. Alito has shown an alarming willingness to ignore checks and balances and seek legislative oversight.
If the Court were to change - for whatever reason - in the coming months, it could upend in the election in any number of ways.
The Fifth Doctor is the father in law of both the Tenth and Fourteenth Doctor, both of whom are the father of their wife
Not familiar with this show, is it a reality show set in Norwich?
The Fifth Doctor is played by the actor Peter Davison IRL. His daughter is Georgia Moffet. She played the daughter of the Tenth Doctor in the show, who was played by David Tennant. Georgia and David fell in love and got married IRL. Due to a catastrophic downturn in ratings David Tennant was brought back to the show to play the Fourteenth Doctor, starting later this month.
Simples.
Saint RTD says the new stuff is a complete reboot.
No, he's explicitly said he's not contradicting continuity set up by Chibnall, but the show is being presented as a fresh thing, re-starting the season numbering (although that's more about it going to Disney+ outside the UK).
Yesterday we were vaguely discussing how people had lived with animals all their lives etc.,.
This evening Casa Cyclefree has reverted to an even older habit: sitting with our animals round a fire on which we cook - braising steak + veg - very slowly,
All we need now is a storyteller telling tales.
There's that specific Danish word for this sort of 'cold outside but it's warm in here' scenario.
Hygge I think.
It has not been particularly cold.
Yesterday was a glorious autumn day with the tree colours at their most magnificent. Perfect Sunday afternoon walk weather.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
"Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."
I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.
I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.
I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.
What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.
I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
Sorry - of course not Scalia; Alito. Not that there is much difference between their jurisprudence (except that Scalia actually did have some slight unorthodox positions for a GOP judge, whereas Alito is very much a Fox News judge).
Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were charmingly close. Their families used to celebrate New Year's Eve together, and the pair used to go shopping and on trips to the opera together quite regularly.
I expect the conservative and liberal justices remain pretty civil overall. But Scalia/Ginsburg was exceptional given they were essentially the extremes of the court, and it speaks to a rather different age.
The interesting thing about the supreme court is that some of the justices are not as ideological as you think. On a scale of +8 (most conservative ) to -8 (most liberal), the current scores are roughly as follows:
Thomas +3 Scalia +2.5 Barrett +1.5 Gorsuch +1 Kavanaugh +0.75 Roberts +0.75 Kagan -1.75 Sotomayor -4
Brown Jackson doesn't have a rating yet.
The key will be defining the standard in the 14th amendment.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Can’t think of anyone else
It’s his fault, to a large extent, that Biden didn’t run rather than Hilary.
I don’t think there’s anyone very well placed to tell a sitting president not to run for a second term. Therein lies the problem.
As an aside, there is the risk - presumably - of Trump being tried for perjury off the back of this case.
Normally I would say not. Defendants rarely get prosecuted for lying in the dock. But there is a political element to this trial no matter how much the AG says otherwise.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Can’t think of anyone else
It’s his fault, to a large extent, that Biden didn’t run rather than Hilary.
I don’t think there’s anyone very well placed to tell a sitting president not to run for a second term. Therein lies the problem.
I thought Biden didn't run in 2016 because of his son's accident?
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?
None as far as I know.
LBJ was as a result of very poor health - and was a personal decision.
Biden has a lock on the Democratic Party system
LBJ couldn’t face the humiliation of being beaten by RFK. RFK used to joke every message he got from the President once he was senator was addressed RFK SOB.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Can’t think of anyone else
It’s his fault, to a large extent, that Biden didn’t run rather than Hilary.
I don’t think there’s anyone very well placed to tell a sitting president not to run for a second term. Therein lies the problem.
I thought Biden didn't run in 2016 because of his son's accident?
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
An underrated factor I think is Trump's mental acuity. It's ignored in a way Biden's often isn't, both because of the assumption Trump's fans don't care when he's been crazy in the past, and because well, even at his sharpest, he sounds completely off his rocker. But if he's under the spotlight and pitiably daft, rather than unhinged but biting, then the reality of Trump becomes a less appealing prospect for some of those who like the idea of him.
Problem with Trump looking pitiably daft is that to many people Bozo looked pitably daft well before the 2019 election but he still won by a country mile
Yes, but look who Johnson was up against. Someone the country viewed as even more ridiculous - and with good reason, given world events since. Boris was always a marmite figure. Just up against a turd sandwich spread.
Plus there's a difference between a clown and chancer who's still relatively got some of their wits about them and one who hasn't. Same as with Trump. One of the worst people around. Inveterate liar. Crooked as a Staffordshire pub and a lunatic. But from the perspective of his voters, doing so as a member of their 'team' who'll use those perceived faults against their enemies and shake things up. That stops working quite so well if goes from merely chaotic to rambling incoherence opponents can begin to laugh at rather than get annoyed or scared by it.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Can’t think of anyone else
It’s his fault, to a large extent, that Biden didn’t run rather than Hilary.
I don’t think there’s anyone very well placed to tell a sitting president not to run for a second term. Therein lies the problem.
I thought Biden didn't run in 2016 because of his son's accident?
Sorry, Beau Biden did not have an accident, it was cancer.
Anyway:
By late 2015, Biden was still uncertain about running. He felt his son [Beau]'s recent death had largely drained his emotional energy, and said, "nobody has a right ... to seek that office unless they're willing to give it 110% of who they are."[253] On October 21, speaking from a podium in the Rose Garden with his wife and Obama by his side, Biden announced his decision not to run for president in 2016.[254][255][256]
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Its gonna be Biden, unless he falls over
Someone needs to have the chops to whisper in the Presiden’t ear, that perhaps he should stand down.
That person needs to be prepared to be fired immediately though, so it needs to be someone set to retire at the election anyway.
Who has that seniority in the Democrat party? Obama maybe?
Can’t think of anyone else
It’s his fault, to a large extent, that Biden didn’t run rather than Hilary.
I don’t think there’s anyone very well placed to tell a sitting president not to run for a second term. Therein lies the problem.
I thought Biden didn't run in 2016 because of his son's accident?
Sorry, Beau Biden did not have an accident, it was cancer.
Anyway:
By late 2015, Biden was still uncertain about running. He felt his son [Beau]'s recent death had largely drained his emotional energy, and said, "nobody has a right ... to seek that office unless they're willing to give it 110% of who they are."[253] On October 21, speaking from a podium in the Rose Garden with his wife and Obama by his side, Biden announced his decision not to run for president in 2016.[254][255][256]
Indeed. But there are a score of contemporary articles about Obama’s coolness towards his running. While it’s almost certainly true Biden would have ignored that, had his son not died, it’s pretty likely a factor in his decision.
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
There tends to be a larger vote in the area of a party leader.
So Labour did well in London 2019 because of Corbyn (what about the Boris effect?).
Labour did well in 2010 in Scotland due to Brown.
LibDems did well in Scotland in the 0s due to Kennedy.
Conservatives did well in East Anglia due to Major.
So a lower Labour vote in London is not unexpected. Also Sunak may appeal to the professional class in London?
Ukrainian Major Hennadiy Chastyakov was killed Monday by an explosive device hidden inside a gift that had been given to him for his birthday, according to Valeriy Zaluzhny, commander-in-chief of the armed forces of Ukraine. https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1721611235962020193
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Is it really hard to judge whether the Supreme Court will bar Trump from standing on the ground on insurrection?
No.
His court testimony is pretty demented though.
DeSantis is finally getting dirty now he's already lost, but he might as well have tried earlier, since sucking up and later attacking just looks silly.
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
There tends to be a larger vote in the area of a party leader.
So Labour did well in London 2019 because of Corbyn (what about the Boris effect?).
Labour did well in 2010 in Scotland due to Brown.
LibDems did well in Scotland in the 0s due to Kennedy.
Conservatives did well in East Anglia due to Major.
So a lower Labour vote in London is not unexpected. Also Sunak may appeal to the professional class in London?
But will the Tories do well in North Yorkshire because of Rishi? Selby and Ainsty by-election suggests not.
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
There tends to be a larger vote in the area of a party leader.
So Labour did well in London 2019 because of Corbyn (what about the Boris effect?).
Labour did well in 2010 in Scotland due to Brown.
LibDems did well in Scotland in the 0s due to Kennedy.
Conservatives did well in East Anglia due to Major.
So a lower Labour vote in London is not unexpected. Also Sunak may appeal to the professional class in London?
Where the swing is driven by the unpopularity of one party, it's obviously going to be bigger where that party has more votes to defect or abstain, and smaller in places like London where the Tory vote was smaller.
I know part of it is Trump performing, even if there are no live cameras in the court room, but it's so hard to avoid armchair diagnosing Trump because his childlike rages and tantrums are just pure insanity.
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
As an aside, there is the risk - presumably - of Trump being tried for perjury off the back of this case.
I expect it as a certainty. In fact, I do wonder when when a judge will find him in contempt and send him down to the cells.
I don't think they will. He'll cross the line to when anyone else would be, but I think he knows they don't dare and that's why he is so bold - that's what bullies do after all, when they know they can't really be restrained.
I know part of it is Trump performing, even if there are no live cameras in the court room, but it's so hard to avoid armchair diagnosing Trump because his childlike rages and tantrums are just pure insanity.
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
I know part of it is Trump performing, even if there are no live cameras in the court room, but it's so hard to avoid armchair diagnosing Trump because his childlike rages and tantrums are just pure insanity.
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
Would you?
To a degree - I could perform for my client in my own style without trying to copy him.
I know part of it is Trump performing, even if there are no live cameras in the court room, but it's so hard to avoid armchair diagnosing Trump because his childlike rages and tantrums are just pure insanity.
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
Would you?
To a degree - I could perform for my client in my own style without trying to copy him.
I was just thinking of the way they've behaved up to now.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
In Scotland the Tories are in quite a different strategic position; in many seats their main opposition is even less popular than they are.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
I know part of it is Trump performing, even if there are no live cameras in the court room, but it's so hard to avoid armchair diagnosing Trump because his childlike rages and tantrums are just pure insanity.
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
Yes, it’s clearly a deliberate tactic.
But this sort of stuff read into the record is probably rather more important. NY AG lawyer: This says "in order to induce lending" - you see that? Trump: Yes. NY AG lawyer: Little Roman i, it says as of June 30, 2011 - do you believe it was true and accurate? Trump: Yeah, I do. https://twitter.com/innercitypress/status/1721608619408437534
I know part of it is Trump performing, even if there are no live cameras in the court room, but it's so hard to avoid armchair diagnosing Trump because his childlike rages and tantrums are just pure insanity.
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
There was a brilliant documentary about John McAfee. Not brilliant in the sense of the people making it being geniuses - they actually bought into the cult.
But by doing so, they got far enough inside that they accidentally cornered McAfee. And his inner personality came out. Genuinely scary man inside…
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
As an aside, there is the risk - presumably - of Trump being tried for perjury off the back of this case.
I expect it as a certainty. In fact, I do wonder when when a judge will find him in contempt and send him down to the cells.
I don't think they will. He'll cross the line to when anyone else would be, but I think he knows they don't dare and that's why he is so bold - that's what bullies do after all, when they know they can't really be restrained.
The judges will take pleasure in not reacting. And when it comes to sentencing, will take pleasure in giving him a sentence that is appeal proof.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Soon after Nancy Pelosi became leader of the Democrats in the House, I found I could predict most of what she would do by thinking about two books, "The Last Hurrah" and Mike Royko's "Boss". Two examples: Her toleration of corruption in the Democratic Party, and her foreign policy views toward China.
With Trump I find that I can predict much of what he will do and say by thinking about Calvin of "Calvin and Hobbes". For example, when Calvin says that would rather have money than fame or power, because you can use money to buy fame and power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_Hobbes
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
If Trump is convicted of a criminal offence in relation to the insurrection in January 2020, certainly he could be at risk of having the 14th amendment invoked against him making him ineligible to be President anyway. In which case the GOP would have to pick a new nominee
It's a very good call. Trump has two issues going against him. First, his legal problems. As the NYT/Siena polling over the weekend shows, a conviction moves key states from Trump's column to that of Biden. Second, the current shitshow in the House is doing the GOP no favours. It's alienating Independents and pushing them firmly towards Biden.
My working assumption for sometime now has been that neither Biden nor Trump will run. There's been a noticeable increase in the public profile of the VP in the past three months. For a long time it was assumed that Harris would jump ship and take over Feinstein's seat. It didn't happen. Although Laphonza Butler has said she will not run for the seat I don't expect that to hold. If Harris was considering a tilt at Feinstein's seat she'd have to make a move pretty soon to allow the Dems time to appoint a replacement as VP.
I'm of the opinion that Biden will withdraw at some stage (for whatever reason) and that Harris will be the nominee. Which leads me on to the GOP.
My money's on Nikki Haley. She is the only credible candidate within the GOP. The sort of candidate who can show some leg to the Trump diehards but appeal to the broader GOP movement and Independents. I say this as someone who lived, studied and worked in South Carolina throughout the 00s and some of the 10s. I say this as someone who has studied the politics of South Carolina and used it as a case study for a Phd. Haley is very adept at raising a finger and working out in which direction the wind is blowing. She's far more astute than most commentators recognise (though this is now changing) and - this is such a low bar - can actually explain in layman's terms how a policy will impact an individual.
I can see it being Harris v Haley. And Haley wins.
There. I've said it. You can all do your thing now and critique/rubbish my position. I can take it.
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
In Scotland the Tories are in quite a different strategic position; in many seats their main opposition is even less popular than they are.
Those tend to be the seats where the Tories are competitive. Rural, small town, socially conservative, where Yousaf is almost uniquely non-equipped to appeal. Tory vote will likely crater in urban Central Belt but that won't help SNP as they'll be transferring to Labour.
Soon after Nancy Pelosi became leader of the Democrats in the House, I found I could predict most of what she would do by thinking about two books, "The Last Hurrah" and Mike Royko's "Boss". Two examples: Her toleration of corruption in the Democratic Party, and her foreign policy views toward China.
With Trump I find that I can predict much of what he will do and say by thinking about Calvin of "Calvin and Hobbes". For example, when Calvin says that would rather have money than fame or power, because you can use money to buy fame and power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_Hobbes
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
To the Owen Joneses of the world accusing Israel of genocide..
If Israel wanted to kill all Gazans, there would be a million dead by now
The barely-disguised glee this has given Jones and his like really show how near the surface antisemitism has long been on the far left for years. It’s been fomented in the NUS, the BDS movement as an article of faith for decades now.
This article from the Times yesterday (de-paywalled hence the odd-looking link) does an excellent job of describing the situation: https://archive.ph/T45zS
This paragraph in particular:
“It allows a phoney progressivism: antisemites make displays of compassion, while concealing their malice. It allows a phoney bravado: antisemites make displays of courage and fortitude, while facing no actual threat.”
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
Indeed
That’s a very persuasive article. One of the many clinching arguments is that, in the past, challenging a sitting president has always killed political careers. So no one does it
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
In Scotland the Tories are in quite a different strategic position; in many seats their main opposition is even less popular than they are.
Those tend to be the seats where the Tories are competitive. Rural, small town, socially conservative, where Yousaf is almost uniquely non-equipped to appeal. Tory vote will likely crater in urban Central Belt but that won't help SNP as they'll be transferring to Labour.
There will be some interesting Tory seats where Labour were once competitive but supplanted by SNP, such as Dumfries and Galloway. The Scottish results will be especially fascinating at the next GE.
As an aside, there is the risk - presumably - of Trump being tried for perjury off the back of this case.
I expect it as a certainty. In fact, I do wonder when when a judge will find him in contempt and send him down to the cells.
The risk in relation to perjury in this case is quite low, I think. This is a civil case, where the verdict will be based on balance of probabilities. The most direct clash in testimony is between Trump and Cohen, who is hardly all that more credible. The judge will simply say Trump was not a particularly credible witness. Happens all the time in civil cases without criminal perjury charges following.
On contempt, the judge may fine him again. But there are at least a couple of steps from the pretty token $10k fine previously and a night in the cells. He'd add a zero before getting there.
It’s pretty damn convincing. Biden it is - black swans and health issues aside
When has a US political party ever de-selected a sitting President?
My initial guesses of LBJ and Teddy R were wrong. Anybody got better guesses?
None as far as I know.
LBJ was as a result of very poor health - and was a personal decision.
Biden has a lock on the Democratic Party system
I don't think that's accurate: LBJ nearly lost the New Hampshire Primary to Eugene McCarthy (50% to 42%), which led to Robert F Kennedy entering the race. At that point LBJ's polling numbers collapsed; he was getting just 12% in a poll for the Wisconsin primary, and he realised he was unlikely to win and stepped down.
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
In Scotland the Tories are in quite a different strategic position; in many seats their main opposition is even less popular than they are.
Those tend to be the seats where the Tories are competitive. Rural, small town, socially conservative, where Yousaf is almost uniquely non-equipped to appeal. Tory vote will likely crater in urban Central Belt but that won't help SNP as they'll be transferring to Labour.
The Scottish Tories have lucked out. Back in 1997, Scots voted for whoever was best placed to vote out a Conservative MP. Now, Unionists will hold their noses in 6-8 seats and vote Conservative in preference to the SNP. In 5 more seats they’ll vote Lib Dem. In the other 46-48, they’ll vote Labour. If the SNP vote falls below 35%, FPTP punishes them terribly.
To the Owen Joneses of the world accusing Israel of genocide..
If Israel wanted to kill all Gazans, there would be a million dead by now
The barely-disguised glee this has given Jones and his like really show how near the surface antisemitism has long been on the far left for years. It’s been fomented in the NUS, the BDS movement as an article of faith for decades now.
This article from the Times yesterday (de-paywalled hence the odd-looking link) does an excellent job of describing the situation: https://archive.ph/T45zS
This paragraph in particular:
“It allows a phoney progressivism: antisemites make displays of compassion, while concealing their malice. It allows a phoney bravado: antisemites make displays of courage and fortitude, while facing no actual threat.”
It is very depressing. But should not be surprising given the way the Labour Party fell for Corbyn.
On topic, I disagree. The odds on both Trump and Biden are too long.
FWIW, I don't think the 14th Amendment challenge will come to anything. Unlike Mike, I think it's very easy to see which way the SCOTUS would vote. Trump has been neither convicted nor impeached on any charges relating to insurrection and for all his egging them on and leaving the door open to DC, made clear to avoid any direct involvement other than ambiguous words. That could change before the primaries / convention / general election but don't bank on it.
However, I agree with AbandonedHope that the GOP in Congress will be a drag on their party, as will the utter divisiveness and vindictiveness of Trump. Granted, he's not facing a strong opponent and is unlikely to do so even if it's not Biden (though I fully expect it to be), and we certainly shouldn't rule out a Trump comeback.
And on that point, 13/8 (BetVictor) is pretty attractive. However, 9/4 for Biden is even more attractive. He has a clear run at the primary and, despite any amount of unfounded rumour to the contrary, shows no inclination whatsoever to step down from a job he's been after all his life. True, his polling isn't great but he's far from the first president to be in that position at this stage.
That said, Trump is in his late-70s and Biden in his 80s. Health has to be an issue for both of them (an underrated point re Trump, given his weight, diet, age and stress). But it ought to be way over a 69% shot that one or the other will win.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
In Scotland the Tories are in quite a different strategic position; in many seats their main opposition is even less popular than they are.
Those tend to be the seats where the Tories are competitive. Rural, small town, socially conservative, where Yousaf is almost uniquely non-equipped to appeal. Tory vote will likely crater in urban Central Belt but that won't help SNP as they'll be transferring to Labour.
The Scottish Tories have lucked out. Back in 1997, Scots voted for whoever was best placed to vote out a Conservative MP. Now, Unionists will hold their noses in 6-8 seats and vote Conservative in preference to the SNP. In 5 more seats they’ll vote Lib Dem. In the other 46-48, they’ll vote Labour. If the SNP vote falls below 35%, FPTP punishes them terribly.
They’ve done very well by FPTP to this point so no sympathy here. In the last GE they got 48 MPs off 3.9% of the popular vote. Three times as many people voted Lib Dem, and they got 11 MPs.
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Oh well, 10,000 Palestinians dead in Gaza inside a month.
This is a war which Hamas declared on 7th October. When your enemy intends to extinguish your entire nation you fight to the finish, sadly, which means Hamas relinquishing its war aims, and releasing the hostages.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Translation: "10 lives for every Israeli!"
Apparently Hamas numbers 25-30k
Get there and start counting
Well, 10,000 is almost 10 times 1,400, so the Israelis are almost there.
You're quoting terrorist propaganda
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
Terrorist propaganda?
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
Even if your terrorist numbers are somewhere near accurate, how many of them were human shields?
Those go in the Hamas kills column, not the Israeli's
Israel is the one dropping the bombs
On their genocidal enemy
10,000 Palestinian deaths not enough for you?
More Germans died in WW2 from Allied bombing than Brits died from German attacks. That doesn't make Germany the good guys.
FWIW. I do think that Israel is being reckless in its attacks, and unjustified in some instances. But raw numbers are a poor way of establishing moral righteousness.
"Inevitably this will end up before the Supreme Court and it is hard to judge which way they will go."
I think that this SCOTUS would probably make some spurious argument that either a) Trump's behaviour does not meet the criteria in the 14th Amendment because he was never found guilty by Congress (via impeachment) and that is the only standard that should be considered to define if someone already in office has broken their oath or b) that the voters should be allowed to make their minds up because, even if he does violate the criteria in the 14th Amendment, the democratic will of the voters is more important or c) that it is too close to the election to interfere.
I think a) might have some legal legs, c) is a cop out that people might accept and b) would essentially be SCOTUS opening the door for lots of Civil Rights legislation / amendments mattering as long as there is enough popular will to not have to keep them. I would personally put money on something like a) - but Roberts would not be a part of that opinion; it will instead be written by Scalia or Thomas and have the other 3 conservative votes. The only reason Roberts might sign on to it is so he can make sure Scalia or Thomas don't write the opinion, and can soften whatever reasoning they use.
I also think that Trump could still win even if he isn't on the ballot in many states, because I doubt many of those states will be battleground states / will have that requirement on the books by the time the election comes around if they are under state wide GOP control.
What I think is increasingly likely is Biden won't be the Democratic nominee - that he will drop out due to "health issues" that is really just pressure from the Democratic party looking at his numbers sliding and the main reason being his age and wanting a better candidate. Whether he does this prior to the primaries starting or only does it towards the end for the convention to make the decision, I don't know.
I absolutely guarantee that Scalia will not be writing it
Sorry - of course not Scalia; Alito. Not that there is much difference between their jurisprudence (except that Scalia actually did have some slight unorthodox positions for a GOP judge, whereas Alito is very much a Fox News judge).
Scalia was a proper Justice, who had his own set of priorities (which didn't always match the GOP). He also had great personal relations with the liberal members of the Supreme Court, including a very deep relationship with Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
For what it's worth, I hold Goresuch, Kavanagh and Barrett in reasonable standing. Sure, I think they were mad to sign up to Thomas's gun rights decision, but they all have at least a streak of individualism.
By contrast, I have very little time for Alito, and none at all for Thomas.
To the Owen Joneses of the world accusing Israel of genocide..
If Israel wanted to kill all Gazans, there would be a million dead by now
The barely-disguised glee this has given Jones and his like really show how near the surface antisemitism has long been on the far left for years. It’s been fomented in the NUS, the BDS movement as an article of faith for decades now.
This article from the Times yesterday (de-paywalled hence the odd-looking link) does an excellent job of describing the situation: https://archive.ph/T45zS
This paragraph in particular:
“It allows a phoney progressivism: antisemites make displays of compassion, while concealing their malice. It allows a phoney bravado: antisemites make displays of courage and fortitude, while facing no actual threat.”
It is very depressing. But should not be surprising given the way the Labour Party fell for Corbyn.
As an aside, there is the risk - presumably - of Trump being tried for perjury off the back of this case.
I expect it as a certainty. In fact, I do wonder when when a judge will find him in contempt and send him down to the cells.
The risk in relation to perjury in this case is quite low, I think. This is a civil case, where the verdict will be based on balance of probabilities. The most direct clash in testimony is between Trump and Cohen, who is hardly all that more credible. The judge will simply say Trump was not a particularly credible witness. Happens all the time in civil cases without criminal perjury charges following.
On contempt, the judge may fine him again. But there are at least a couple of steps from the pretty token $10k fine previously and a night in the cells. He'd add a zero before getting there.
I cannot understand the attitude of the more left-leaning media in the US towards Michael Cohen. It is almost as if they regard him as a wronged son, repenting of his deeds and returning to the fold.
AFAICS, he spent decades doing Trump's bidding and has only had his Damascene conversion after he was thrown under the Trump bus.
He strikes me as a nasty piece of work who is taking the chance to get his own back rather than suffering genuine remorse.
The haunting sound that Roman soldiers would have heard from their Celtic enemies before battle was produced by the Celtic Carnyx. This ancient wind instrument was used by the Celts during the period from 300 B.C. to 200 A.D.
According to the Greek historian Polybius, the Carnyx was employed in warfare to rouse troops to battle and to strike fear into the hearts of their opponents. Due to its significant height, the instrument's sounds could carry over the heads of those engaged in battles or ceremonies. https://twitter.com/historyinmemes/status/1721314751844684215
Comments
Can’t think of anyone else
Have there not been certain SCOTUS decisions ruling against Trump, even since he packed it with his chosen appointees?
One slightly Machiavellian reason I have heard suggested why the SCOTUS may not ultimately back Trump is because his declared political intentions / contempt for the rule of law are a direct threat to their position, and they like being Supreme.
However, although I have all of them on dvd I’m enjoying the original series on IPlayer..
LBJ was as a result of very poor health - and was a personal decision.
Biden has a lock on the Democratic Party system
He died just a couple of days after Nixon's second inauguration, oddly enough. So, in theory, he might have seen out his second term (third, depending on how you see it) had he lived. He'd probably have had to resign through ill health though - he was very weak as 1972 wore on.
There was a violent insurrection by his supporters in January, far larger in scale than in DC in 2021, and the Congressional investigation puts Bolsonaro at the heart of its organisation.
There are, of course, political aspects to the allegations, and he may be less involved than is claimed. He personally made himself scarce, for sure, but a lot of nasty stuff happened in his name even if he has a fig leaf of plausible deniability.
"MOSCOW — Russia’s arrest of Igor Girkin, the former security agent who was convicted this year in absentia by a Dutch court in the 2014 downing of a passenger jet over Ukraine, made clear that Moscow’s protection had come to an end.
But it was also a warning shot to the country’s ultranationalist hawks, who believe President Vladimir Putin hasn’t gone hard enough on Ukraine and have grown increasingly vocal about it."
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/11/05/russia-fsb-strelkov-kremlin-putin/
But it certainly is interesting.
(For the record: I can't recall having read anything by the reporter, Francesca Ebel, before this article, so I can't judge her credibility.)
I expect the conservative and liberal justices remain pretty civil overall. But Scalia/Ginsburg was exceptional given they were essentially the extremes of the court, and it speaks to a rather different age.
If the Court were to change - for whatever reason - in the coming months, it could upend in the election in any number of ways.
It has not been particularly cold.
Yesterday was a glorious autumn day with the tree colours at their most magnificent. Perfect Sunday afternoon walk weather.
As Hamas knows this, the question to ask them is how many more than 10,000 is enough for them? I hope Gazans are asking it, but I have yet to hear a word of disagreement with Hamas from within Gaza.
Thomas +3
Scalia +2.5
Barrett +1.5
Gorsuch +1
Kavanaugh +0.75
Roberts +0.75
Kagan -1.75
Sotomayor -4
Brown Jackson doesn't have a rating yet.
The key will be defining the standard in the 14th amendment.
Anyone else would be humiliated but Trump will just try to brush it off.
I don’t think there’s anyone very well placed to tell a sitting president not to run for a second term. Therein lies the problem.
But I think he might have run, and probably won, had Obama backed him.
“One of the great imponderables…”
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/04/bidens-20202-announcement-brought-praise-obama/587989/
Get there and start counting
Plus there's a difference between a clown and chancer who's still relatively got some of their wits about them and one who hasn't. Same as with Trump. One of the worst people around. Inveterate liar. Crooked as a Staffordshire pub and a lunatic. But from the perspective of his voters, doing so as a member of their 'team' who'll use those perceived faults against their enemies and shake things up. That stops working quite so well if goes from merely chaotic to rambling incoherence opponents can begin to laugh at rather than get annoyed or scared by it.
Anyway:
By late 2015, Biden was still uncertain about running. He felt his son [Beau]'s recent death had largely drained his emotional energy, and said, "nobody has a right ... to seek that office unless they're willing to give it 110% of who they are."[253] On October 21, speaking from a podium in the Rose Garden with his wife and Obama by his side, Biden announced his decision not to run for president in 2016.[254][255][256]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden#Vice_presidency_(2009–2017)
Glancing at the R&W tables, the 2019 Conservative vote splits 56% Conservative, 16% Labour, 13% Don't Know, 9% Reform.
We also have the extraordinary notion the Conservatives are polling better in Scotland than London. The YouGov poll for London has a 35 point Labour lead compared with a 16 point advantage at the December 2019 election so a 9.5% swing to Labour.
The Redfield & Wilton numbers this evening show a 14.5% swing nationally so quite likely this is hiding some much larger swings outside London.
The other big betting event is the Melbourne Cup which starts at 4.15am (some will no doubt be up and about). VAUBAN is 9/4 favourite and may be that obvious but in a 23-runner field you're going to need plenty of luck. My idea of the winner is second favourite WITHOUT A FIGHT and from the lower weights I'd throw in MORE MELONS and FUTURE HISTORY for your trifecta.
Trump just yelled at the judge for a several minute stretch. The judge has his brow furrowed, but otherwise didn't react.
https://twitter.com/eorden/status/1721577026773999946
I'll believe the numbers once Hamas is eliminated
So at least 15k to go
But there are a score of contemporary articles about Obama’s coolness towards his running. While it’s almost certainly true Biden would have ignored that, had his son not died, it’s pretty likely a factor in his decision.
So Labour did well in London 2019 because of Corbyn (what about the Boris effect?).
Labour did well in 2010 in Scotland due to Brown.
LibDems did well in Scotland in the 0s due to Kennedy.
Conservatives did well in East Anglia due to Major.
So a lower Labour vote in London is not unexpected. Also Sunak may appeal to the professional class in London?
https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1721611235962020193
On 25 October, US President Joe Biden stated he had "no confidence" in the death totals reported by the Gaza Health Ministry.[418][419] In response, Human Rights Watch stated that after three decades working in Gaza and conducting its own investigation, it considers Gaza Health Ministry's totals to be reliable.[419] Matthew Miller made a similar claim to Biden, despite the fact that the US Department of State cites the Gaza Health Ministry's death tolls in its own internal reports.[420]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israel–Hamas_war
His court testimony is pretty demented though.
DeSantis is finally getting dirty now he's already lost, but he might as well have tried earlier, since sucking up and later attacking just looks silly.
(And SKS is of course a London MP).
I assume they are trying to piss off the judge so much they have something to hook an appeal on, given even Trump's lawyers engage in it, when you'd think even they would try to be professional.
Those go in the Hamas kills column, not the Israeli's
But this sort of stuff read into the record is probably rather more important.
NY AG lawyer: This says "in order to induce lending" - you see that?
Trump: Yes.
NY AG lawyer: Little Roman i, it says as of June 30, 2011 - do you believe it was true and accurate?
Trump: Yeah, I do.
https://twitter.com/innercitypress/status/1721608619408437534
But by doing so, they got far enough inside that they accidentally cornered McAfee. And his inner personality came out. Genuinely scary man inside…
With Trump I find that I can predict much of what he will do and say by thinking about Calvin of "Calvin and Hobbes". For example, when Calvin says that would rather have money than fame or power, because you can use money to buy fame and power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_Hobbes
We need at least 25-30k, to ensure the elimination of Hamas
How many genocidal Hamas terrorists do you want to survive this?
If Israel wanted to kill all Gazans, there would be a million dead by now
This article from the Times yesterday (de-paywalled hence the odd-looking link) does an excellent job of describing the situation: https://archive.ph/T45zS
This paragraph in particular:
“It allows a phoney progressivism: antisemites make displays of compassion, while concealing their malice. It allows a phoney bravado: antisemites make displays of courage and fortitude, while facing no actual threat.”
On contempt, the judge may fine him again. But there are at least a couple of steps from the pretty token $10k fine previously and a night in the cells. He'd add a zero before getting there.
From March 2020 - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/03/12/amber-warnings-what-might-be-the-signals-that-all-is-not-well-in-a-democracy/
FWIW, I don't think the 14th Amendment challenge will come to anything. Unlike Mike, I think it's very easy to see which way the SCOTUS would vote. Trump has been neither convicted nor impeached on any charges relating to insurrection and for all his egging them on and leaving the door open to DC, made clear to avoid any direct involvement other than ambiguous words. That could change before the primaries / convention / general election but don't bank on it.
However, I agree with AbandonedHope that the GOP in Congress will be a drag on their party, as will the utter divisiveness and vindictiveness of Trump. Granted, he's not facing a strong opponent and is unlikely to do so even if it's not Biden (though I fully expect it to be), and we certainly shouldn't rule out a Trump comeback.
And on that point, 13/8 (BetVictor) is pretty attractive. However, 9/4 for Biden is even more attractive. He has a clear run at the primary and, despite any amount of unfounded rumour to the contrary, shows no inclination whatsoever to step down from a job he's been after all his life. True, his polling isn't great but he's far from the first president to be in that position at this stage.
That said, Trump is in his late-70s and Biden in his 80s. Health has to be an issue for both of them (an underrated point re Trump, given his weight, diet, age and stress). But it ought to be way over a 69% shot that one or the other will win.
Anyway, how's this for alliteration?
Bloodthirsty bellicose Blanche backs Bibi's Butcher Boys
FWIW. I do think that Israel is being reckless in its attacks, and unjustified in some instances. But raw numbers are a poor way of establishing moral righteousness.
For what it's worth, I hold Goresuch, Kavanagh and Barrett in reasonable standing. Sure, I think they were mad to sign up to Thomas's gun rights decision, but they all have at least a streak of individualism.
By contrast, I have very little time for Alito, and none at all for Thomas.
The term “ anti-Semite” should be dropped, in favour of “Jew hater.”
AFAICS, he spent decades doing Trump's bidding and has only had his Damascene conversion after he was thrown under the Trump bus.
He strikes me as a nasty piece of work who is taking the chance to get his own back rather than suffering genuine remorse.
The haunting sound that Roman soldiers would have heard from their Celtic enemies before battle was produced by the Celtic Carnyx. This ancient wind instrument was used by the Celts during the period from 300 B.C. to 200 A.D.
According to the Greek historian Polybius, the Carnyx was employed in warfare to rouse troops to battle and to strike fear into the hearts of their opponents. Due to its significant height, the instrument's sounds could carry over the heads of those engaged in battles or ceremonies.
https://twitter.com/historyinmemes/status/1721314751844684215