Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Trump goes on the offensive threatening Haley’s donors – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,010
edited February 4 in General
imageTrump goes on the offensive threatening Haley’s donors – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,187
    edited January 25
    First.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,522
    Awful man
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,586
    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,912
    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,088
    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,559
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Sense has been largely missing from Trump’s actions for several years.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,662
    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    Nah, he knows most of the Republican elite hate him and want him gone. This is nothing to do with Haley or her supporters but a reminder to the rest of them to keep bending the knee and saying yes sir, thank you sir.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,492

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Sense has been largely missing from Trump’s actions for several years.
    The problem is he seems to get away with it most of the time. People are so taken aback by his brazenness that they somehow respect him for it.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?
  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,294
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Trump runs things by fear. He will expect that Haley's supporters and donors will come grovelling to him anyway once he's destroyed her. And he's probably right.
  • Options
    He can’t be loved.

    Maybe it’s the same story behind all the sexual assaults?

    Toxic Dream.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,088

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Coldplay are brilliant ?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,662

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    There is definitely a chance that the Trump appointees will be a lot less loyal to him than he expects. Alito and Thomas probably proper loyal MAGA.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,411
    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    The will to power.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    edited January 25

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    The two issues that are a problem for him with the base are vaccines and the J6 prisoners.
  • Options
    ClippPClippP Posts: 1,684

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Trump runs things by fear. He will expect that Haley's supporters and donors will come grovelling to him anyway once he's destroyed her. And he's probably right.
    It seems to that Trump has Lost It - in both senses of course.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,130

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    So - its our moon. Besides, if we ever get there and colonise that will become a tourist attraction.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,904

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Trump runs things by fear. He will expect that Haley's supporters and donors will come grovelling to him anyway once he's destroyed her. And he's probably right.
    It does seem to be the way with plenty of republicans. Ol' Mitch Mconnell souring on Ukraine funding because he knows the Orange man may be around the corner again...

    They seem to veer from occasional spurts of courage straight back to knowing their place is licking Trump's boots. Mike Pence another good example of this.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,399

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    Yep, image further down page of intended landing shows it on its side
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    Dura_Ace said:

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    The two issues that are a problem for him with the base are vaccines and the J6 prisoners.
    Why so? Vaccines - old news, move along; J6 prisoners - doesn't Trump and his supporters agree they should be pardoned?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,411

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Trump runs things by fear. He will expect that Haley's supporters and donors will come grovelling to him anyway once he's destroyed her. And he's probably right.
    That's what the evidence suggests.
    The donors, anyway. Polling suggests a fair percentage of her vote is likely to be more resistant.

    Many corporate leaders are misguided in playing down the risks of a second term for the Republican former president
    https://www.ft.com/content/8fbf3a47-f622-46cc-ac06-17732cecc313
    ..The 1930s ought to have buried the idea that business is a bulwark against autocracy. Today’s America offers a reminder. After Donald Trump’s attempted putsch on January 6 2021, US business leaders lined up to condemn the storming of Capitol Hill. Jamie Dimon, the chief executive of JPMorgan, issued a statement calling for a peaceful transition of power. “This is not who we are as a people or a country,” he said. In Davos last week, Dimon had changed his tune. Trump did many good things when he was in office, Dimon said. Business was ready for either Joe Biden or Trump: “My company will survive and thrive in both.”

    The US Chamber of Commerce has undergone a similar evolution. “There are some members who, by their actions, will have forfeited the support of the US Chamber of Commerce. Period. Full stop,” said its vice-president, Neil Bradley, in January 2021. The chamber’s ban on giving money to lawmakers who had voted against certifying Biden’s election win was quietly dropped a couple of months later.

    In her state of American business speech one year ago, Suzanne Clark, the chamber’s chief executive, did not mention US democracy. Battling “unprecedented regulatory over-reach” by the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other agencies would be the chamber’s top priority. ..
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,142

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    There is definitely a chance that the Trump appointees will be a lot less loyal to him than he expects. Alito and Thomas probably proper loyal MAGA.
    __

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,042

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,904

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    So - its our moon. Besides, if we ever get there and colonise that will become a tourist attraction.
    My daughter's got a bit of a fascination with the moon at the moment. Demands to see it before bed ! (Not always possible due to clouds or being below the horizon)
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    Selebian said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    Yep, image further down page of intended landing shows it on its side
    Aagh! 🤦🏻‍♂️ Me and my big mouth fat fingers.

    Humble apologies to the most excellent BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,399

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    Meh. Call me back when there's a story about cow tipping on the moon.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,559
    .

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Is there anything Trump could say that would put you off him?
  • Options
    TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,699
    edited January 25
    I can only assume he's expecting (if he wins) that these people will be forced to come back to him and
    "Kneel before Zod" or "force your enemy to acknowledge they were wrong to oppose you" (Superman/Gul Dukat) but even that is too strange to think.

    The most likely result, if he wins - especially if that win is via less votes than Biden - is to plunge the United States into civil war as he seeks to take revenge on all who ever opposed him (and that list is vast).
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,500
    Crudely Baxtered the latest YouGov (YG has been fairly consistent for a time in giving the Tories very low figures) would give the Tories about 42 seats. Furthermore, almost all of them would be on wafer thin majorities.
  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,399
    edited January 25

    Selebian said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    Yep, image further down page of intended landing shows it on its side
    Aagh! 🤦🏻‍♂️ Me and my big mouth fat fingers.

    Humble apologies to the most excellent BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos.
    I thought the same when I first saw it, to be fair. "That's upside down, surely?"

    ETA: And still, it's more like 80 degrees (or maybe 100 - hard to tell which is side supposed to be up) so your point stands :wink:
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679
    Biden really needs to put the screws on Israel and start going full Bernie Sanders to win this election; and if he doesn't and he loses it will be on the Democrats for being so dogshit at politics. I can understand wanting to back the "burn it down" candidate after the "hope and change" candidate did not provide much change or give much hope, and now we have the "back to normal" candidate governing on a "we can't do anything good" platform whilst Trump is going "lol, barriers to my will, not in my administration!". When the state fails to provide basic material needs, of course they want revolution - and the centre / left are very good at only giving people the option of a right wing revolution.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Hysteria in me? It's not hysteria, it's fear.

    In answer to your question, any MAGA candidate that is prepared to a) accept election outcomes, and b) not threaten to lock up his/her opponents would be vastly less of a threat to western democracy.

    Anyone who cannot see the threat Trump poses is frankly as bad as the 1930s Hitler apologists.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,500
    Pulpstar said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    So - its our moon. Besides, if we ever get there and colonise that will become a tourist attraction.
    My daughter's got a bit of a fascination with the moon at the moment. Demands to see it before bed ! (Not always possible due to clouds or being below the horizon)
    Easter full moon is 25th March, always a good one to look out for.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    Selebian said:

    Selebian said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    Yep, image further down page of intended landing shows it on its side
    Aagh! 🤦🏻‍♂️ Me and my big mouth fat fingers.

    Humble apologies to the most excellent BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos.
    I thought the same when I first saw it, to be fair. "That's upside down, surely?"

    ETA: And still, it's more like 80 degrees (or maybe 100 - hard to tell which is side supposed to be up) so your point stands :wink:
    I wonder if they didn't plan to land it on its side to stop it falling over?
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,381

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Question is, if you remove Trump from MAGA, what's left?

    It's not conventional right wingery, because that's de Santis, and we know how well that lasted against The Donald.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,559
    148grss said:

    Biden really needs to put the screws on Israel and start going full Bernie Sanders to win this election; and if he doesn't and he loses it will be on the Democrats for being so dogshit at politics. I can understand wanting to back the "burn it down" candidate after the "hope and change" candidate did not provide much change or give much hope, and now we have the "back to normal" candidate governing on a "we can't do anything good" platform whilst Trump is going "lol, barriers to my will, not in my administration!". When the state fails to provide basic material needs, of course they want revolution - and the centre / left are very good at only giving people the option of a right wing revolution.

    Faced with Trump, the Left needs to stop f***ing moaning and concentrate on supporting Democrat candidates from Biden downwards.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    algarkirk said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    So - its our moon. Besides, if we ever get there and colonise that will become a tourist attraction.
    My daughter's got a bit of a fascination with the moon at the moment. Demands to see it before bed ! (Not always possible due to clouds or being below the horizon)
    Easter full moon is 25th March, always a good one to look out for.
    17:54 GMT today if there's no cloud.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,000

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    Leon said:

    We are about to witness the dissolution of the British Museum, over the next thirty years. Indeed, I wonder if the very concept of a western museum, of global civilisation, is at an end

    1) If Britain wants to be a global player going one to one with other countries, we may have to ameliorate the diplomatic tension by giving back some of the stuff we stole from them and 2) we did steal that stuff from them, so we don't really have a leg to stand on. Imagine if 100-150 years ago the French nicked Stonehenge from us and now just had it in a museum - I think people here would be clamouring for it back.
    I don't think someone who encourages the Houthis to sink ships in the Red Sea is really interested in Britain being a 'global player'.
    You're right, I'm not. But others are.
    So perhaps your advice is best left ignored? It's like taking advice from the sort of people who stone gays.
    It wasn't advice as much as a comment on the situation. I'm glad that it's fine to support the mass slaughter of Palestinian civilians without this level of vitriol, but remarking that the bad people (Houthis) have done a good thing (blockade the Red Sea to attempt to stop that) is considered akin to stoning gay people to death. It's also great to see the great continued tradition of threatening queer people by proxy; of course you would never threaten to stone me to death for my same sex relationships, you just happen to really enjoy using that imagery as a violent fantasy to warn me about how bad other people are.
    You make several mistakes. The first is believing that the Houthis are doing this. They are not; the Iranians are doing it via the Houthis; the Houthis are proxies. The second is that the attacks on Red Sea shipping are in any way to do with what's happened since October; it is not, which is why the Houthis have been doing this since 2016.

    You are siding with the Houthis and Iran; people who execute people for homosexuality. These are the people you support. The Houthis have killed thousands of people; it'd be good if you showed similar concern for them as you do for the Palestinian victims of Israeli aggression.

    IMV it's not exactly wrong of me to point that out.
    I mean, I can also say the Russians are goddamn evil for everything they do in their own country and are doing in Ukraine, but they're on the right side when it comes to Israel Palestine (even if they are massive hypocrites whilst doing so). You can point to an action that is good without that being an endorsement of every action they do.

    As for when the Houthis started doing this, the data seems to show a pretty clear impact point:



    Again, I don't like the Iranian government nor the Houthis in general. But on this issue a blockade is the right thing to do. If Israel was sanctioned, hell if the US just stopped giving them weapons, they wouldn't be able to propagate their genocidal intent. If the actions of the Houthis (whether orchestrated by Iran or not) are pressuring the West and Israel to stop what they're doing - that's good.
    It started as early as 2016. Don't kid yourself that you are supporting Palestinians.
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/13/us-enters-yemen-war-bombing-houthis-who-launched-missiles-at-navy-ship
    https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/curbing-houthi-attacks-civilian-ships-bab-al-mandab

    Yeah, you don't like them so much you support what they are doing. And a blockade is terrible for the world economy, which will hurt the poor most - people you pretend to care about. it's also a massive escalation, and threatens a much wider war.

    You are wrong, factually and morally. You are backing the Iranian view of the world.
    Sanctions always hurt the most poor - I guess that only matters when it is the most poor in the West (or the bottom line of international capital). And like I said previously, the government could always decide to support the poorer in society in that situation - it is a political choice to not (although I'm sure if any big companies are affected negatively bailouts would be forthcoming).

    I would say that the escalation is the bombing of civilians and other neighbouring countries - and that is again coming from Israel.

    Look the position of the West is simple - Israel is a Western ally, therefore they're allowed to do what they want, international law be damned. If we're supposed to swallow that, we can swallow bad people doing one (1) good thing and people saying "it is a good thing that those bad people are doing".
    "I would say that the escalation is the bombing of civilians and other neighbouring countries - and that is again coming from Israel."

    Have you heard about Iran bombing that well-known pro-Israel country, Pakistan? Or the thousands of missiles that have been fired into Israel from Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon over the years?
    This is all you have - whataboutism. I have made my position very clear - you can say "that action is good" to people, a group, a state, whatever that you would typically go "I dislike or disagree with you". If you believe that is impossible - fine, then everyone is awful and you just have to start grading between the levels of awful.
    Frankly attacking civilian shipping going about its lawful business is shameful and I am sad that you think it justified. That said, it fits your world view of the poor innocent Hamas freedom fighters and the Nazi Israelis. There is blame on all sides, but I honestly do not know what people expect Israel to do in the situation they are in. They are surrounded by states that want them extirminated. In the past they have been attacked by many of those states. They were attacked in October by terrorists and are now going after those terrorists. You call it genocide? Genocide is deliberately wiping out a race or people. Ask the Jews in Israel about that - some still remember from WW2. The Houthis are acting as terrorists too.
    I wonder if any Holocaust survivors, Jewish people or Jewish academics who specialise in genocide have called what Israel are doing a genocide? Let me just quickly look... Oh, there are lots of them, and they've been saying it for a while. Huh. Who'd have thought? Maybe my position is also informed by the myriad of Jewish activists for peace or non-Zionist Jewish people?

    It would also be great if there was a court that had some jurisdiction over claiming if things were genocide and if loads of lawyers from multiple countries came together to make an argument in front of that court to give the evidence of genocide and genocidal intent, including statements from politicians and how those statements have been interpreted by troops on the ground. A shame that such a thing does not exist and that this didn't happen. Wait... sorry, when looking for Jewish people who have called this a genocide I also fell across the 5 hours of testimony at the ICJ. Huh. Wow.
    So some people claim it is a genocide - that's it then? All done. Great.

    I don't want another person to die in Gaza. I think they need a two state solution. Sadly too many who have power in those and neighbouring states think a 'better' outcome is possible. For the avoidance of doubt, many of Israel's enemies think wiping out Israel is still possible and are trying to achieve it. Israel has not helped itself with settlers in the West Bank.

    I
    Your argument was "it can't be a genocide because Jewish people / Holocaust survivors know what a genocide is" and so I told you to look into Jewish people and Holocaust survivors who have called this a genocide - including an Israeli Jewish academic who has specialised in the study of genocides. But I'm the one who is just shrugging my shoulders going "well, some people say this, some say that - who are we to say?"
    No, that was not my argument. But the Nazis and their allies (never forget the Nazis did not act alone) tried to exterminate every jew that they could. I don't see the equivalent happening in Gaza. I see a war, with one side holding babies hostage, and the other, equipped with heavy weapons trying to win an asymmetric war against an enemy that is not ready to discuss stopping.

    'Their' added for clarity, before some twonk thinks I am blaming the USA, UK and Canada...
    Which side is which in that sentence?

    https://time.com/6548068/palestinian-children-israeli-prison-arrested/

    And genocide is not defined just by exterminating everyone of a specific race or ethnicity, it also includes the forced migration of a race or ethnicity from their land - such as trying to push roughly 2 million people into the Sinai Peninsula or onto an "artificial island off of Gaza". Indeed - the first part of the Nazi extermination of Jewish people was forced migration (something that a lot of Europe reacted to by refusing to accept Jewish refugees into their countries because they too were massively antisemitic)

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/intelligence-ministry-concept-paper-proposes-transferring-gazans-to-egypts-sinai/#:~:text=Aimed at preserving security for Israel&text=The document proposes moving Gaza's,the displaced Palestinians from entering

    https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/01/22/artificial-island-off-gaza-pitched-by-israeli-minister-in-eu-meeting-is-irrelevant-borrell
    One year old babies? Or Gazan/West Bank teenagers brought up to hate Israel (much as Hitler Youth were raised in the 1930's)
    Was the solution to teenagers in the Hitler Youth to kill them all? No. Indeed, one became
    Pope.
    FPT - I really want to see a version of Saatchi's famous John Major billboard. "What can the Catholic Church do for a former member of the Hitler Youth?"...


    One of the best political ads ever, btw.
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,231
    There's half a point here though. Rich people and companies donating to both sides of opposing campaigns (probably Trump himself has done this) does kind of stink doesn't it? It would make more sense if he said he wouldn't take donations from those donating to Biden, rather than a fellow Republican though.

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679

    148grss said:

    Biden really needs to put the screws on Israel and start going full Bernie Sanders to win this election; and if he doesn't and he loses it will be on the Democrats for being so dogshit at politics. I can understand wanting to back the "burn it down" candidate after the "hope and change" candidate did not provide much change or give much hope, and now we have the "back to normal" candidate governing on a "we can't do anything good" platform whilst Trump is going "lol, barriers to my will, not in my administration!". When the state fails to provide basic material needs, of course they want revolution - and the centre / left are very good at only giving people the option of a right wing revolution.

    Faced with Trump, the Left needs to stop f***ing moaning and concentrate on supporting Democrat candidates from Biden downwards.
    Voters need to be won - not berated. It is incumbent on politicians to give them things to vote for. And it isn't just "the left" - a lot of people who aren't particularly left wing are upset with Biden (especially due to Israel where the Dem membership is like 70% in favour of a ceasefire).
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,411
    Haley responds.
    Whether she'll eventually capitulate, like everyone since Ted Cruz and Little Marco, is open to question. But this does sound just a bit like someone deciding fnck it, let's go all in.
    It will certainly get under his skin.

    @NikkiHaley on Trump: He “threw a temper tantrum,” “pitched a fit.” He’s “insecure” and feels “threatened.” “And he should feel threatened.” She calls him “confused” and questions his “mental competency”; He’s running “revenge” and not relevant issues.
    https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1750329672087249127
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,042

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Hysteria in me? It's not hysteria, it's fear.

    In answer to your question, any MAGA candidate that is prepared to a) accept election outcomes, and b) not threaten to lock up his/her opponents would be vastly less of a threat to western democracy.

    Anyone who cannot see the threat Trump poses is frankly as bad as the 1930s Hitler apologists.
    From "it's not hysteria" straight to a Hitler comparison...
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,000
    algarkirk said:

    Crudely Baxtered the latest YouGov (YG has been fairly consistent for a time in giving the Tories very low figures) would give the Tories about 42 seats. Furthermore, almost all of them would be on wafer thin majorities.

    I mean, this is why the RefUK mini-surge must be terrifying the Tories. They'll leak enough of their nutter vote to let a load of Labour and LD candidates squeak home.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    edited January 25

    Dura_Ace said:

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    The two issues that are a problem for him with the base are vaccines and the J6 prisoners.
    Why so? Vaccines - old news, move along; J6 prisoners - doesn't Trump and his supporters agree they should be pardoned?
    No, vaccines are still huge in Magaworld. Also, Trump could have pardoned all of the J6 freedom fighters in his last few weeks in office but didn't. (In their perception.)
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679
    FPT:

    Trump has released a video on dismantling the deep state:

    https://x.com/leadingreport/status/1750332674701463838

    Trump’s plan to dismantle the ‘Deep State':

    1. Immediately reissue 2020 executive order restoring the president’s authority to remove rogue bureaucrats and wield that power “very aggressively."

    2. Clean out all the corrupt actors in our national security and intelligence apparatus.

    3. Totally reform FISA courts.

    4. Establish a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to declassify and publish all documents on the deep state’s spying, censorship, and corruption.

    5. Launch a major crackdown on government leakers who collude with “fake news to deliberately weave false narratives and subvert our government and democracy.”

    6. Make every inspector general’s office independent and physically separated from the departments they oversee.

    7. Ask Congress to establish an independent auditing system to continually monitor our intelligence agencies.

    8. Continue the effort launched by the Trump administration to move parts of the federal bureaucracy to new locations outside the “Washington Swamp.”

    9. Work to ban federal bureaucrats from taking jobs at the companies they deal with and regulate.

    10. Push a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress.


    Outside of the fact that this is being proposed by Trump and therefore, of course, will mostly be used to deal with his petty grievances rather than increase scrutiny on the executive branch or Congress - these aren't all bad policies even as written. Like 1 and 5 are very questionable, and the invective about "fake news" and "Washington Swamp" are bad - but the overall idea if done in a sincere way would be a boon. A shame it will be imposed by a fascist to make the executive branch more fashy.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,381

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Hysteria in me? It's not hysteria, it's fear.

    In answer to your question, any MAGA candidate that is prepared to a) accept election outcomes, and b) not threaten to lock up his/her opponents would be vastly less of a threat to western democracy.

    Anyone who cannot see the threat Trump poses is frankly as bad as the 1930s Hitler apologists.
    From "it's not hysteria" straight to a Hitler comparison...
    How would you describe someone who threatens to lock up/punish his opponents?

    It's not a healthy thing for a politician to do, is it?
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    The two issues that are a problem for him with the base are vaccines and the J6 prisoners.
    Why so? Vaccines - old news, move along; J6 prisoners - doesn't Trump and his supporters agree they should be pardoned?
    No, vaccines are still huge in Magaworld. Also, Trump could have pardoned all of the J6 freedom fighters in his last few weeks in office but didn't. (In their perception.)
    This is a very small number of people in Magaworld - as DeSantis learned when he tried to go on the offensive about the vaccine and got fucking nowhere. Trump can hand wave it away as he does most things.

    I don't think there is anything that would shift the base - short of literal revelation from the literal resurrected Jesus Christ; and even then I would put odds on them just recrucifying him than turning on Trump.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,559
    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    Biden really needs to put the screws on Israel and start going full Bernie Sanders to win this election; and if he doesn't and he loses it will be on the Democrats for being so dogshit at politics. I can understand wanting to back the "burn it down" candidate after the "hope and change" candidate did not provide much change or give much hope, and now we have the "back to normal" candidate governing on a "we can't do anything good" platform whilst Trump is going "lol, barriers to my will, not in my administration!". When the state fails to provide basic material needs, of course they want revolution - and the centre / left are very good at only giving people the option of a right wing revolution.

    Faced with Trump, the Left needs to stop f***ing moaning and concentrate on supporting Democrat candidates from Biden downwards.
    Voters need to be won - not berated. It is incumbent on politicians to give them things to vote for. And it isn't just "the left" - a lot of people who aren't particularly left wing are upset with Biden (especially due to Israel where the Dem membership is like 70% in favour of a ceasefire).
    Well, I am berating you and you are not a voter in the US election.

    Voters need to be won over. Activists sometimes need to berated.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,492
    "Why Labour is still preparing for a May general election
    Morgan McSweeney told the NEC that Rishi Sunak could be forced to “pre-empt” a leadership challenge.
    By George Eaton"

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/labour/2024/01/why-labour-is-still-preparing-for-a-may-general-election
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,559
    Nigelb said:

    Haley responds.
    Whether she'll eventually capitulate, like everyone since Ted Cruz and Little Marco, is open to question. But this does sound just a bit like someone deciding fnck it, let's go all in.
    It will certainly get under his skin.

    @NikkiHaley on Trump: He “threw a temper tantrum,” “pitched a fit.” He’s “insecure” and feels “threatened.” “And he should feel threatened.” She calls him “confused” and questions his “mental competency”; He’s running “revenge” and not relevant issues.
    https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1750329672087249127

    Mitt Romney, bless him, hasn’t capitulated to Trump. There’s a few other Republicans who haven’t. Liz Cheney.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,411
    148grss said:

    FPT:

    Trump has released a video on dismantling the deep state:

    https://x.com/leadingreport/status/1750332674701463838

    Trump’s plan to dismantle the ‘Deep State':

    1. Immediately reissue 2020 executive order restoring the president’s authority to remove rogue bureaucrats and wield that power “very aggressively."

    2. Clean out all the corrupt actors in our national security and intelligence apparatus.

    3. Totally reform FISA courts.

    4. Establish a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to declassify and publish all documents on the deep state’s spying, censorship, and corruption.

    5. Launch a major crackdown on government leakers who collude with “fake news to deliberately weave false narratives and subvert our government and democracy.”

    6. Make every inspector general’s office independent and physically separated from the departments they oversee.

    7. Ask Congress to establish an independent auditing system to continually monitor our intelligence agencies.

    8. Continue the effort launched by the Trump administration to move parts of the federal bureaucracy to new locations outside the “Washington Swamp.”

    9. Work to ban federal bureaucrats from taking jobs at the companies they deal with and regulate.

    10. Push a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress.


    Outside of the fact that this is being proposed by Trump and therefore, of course, will mostly be used to deal with his petty grievances rather than increase scrutiny on the executive branch or Congress - these aren't all bad policies even as written. Like 1 and 5 are very questionable, and the invective about "fake news" and "Washington Swamp" are bad - but the overall idea if done in a sincere way would be a boon. A shame it will be imposed by a fascist to make the executive branch more fashy.

    "The overall idea" is what, precisely ?
    You could make a case for 6,8 and 9 - and possibly 3 (though how ?), but the rest would require accepting the paranoid premise.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437
    edited January 25

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    There is definitely a chance that the Trump appointees will be a lot less loyal to him than he expects. Alito and Thomas probably proper loyal MAGA.
    The Trump appointee thing is a bit of a red herring, I agree. His three appointees were chosen for their judicial philosophy rather than their loyalty to the MAGA movement. It was about unwinding Roe, which they have done.

    I would agree that it is very hard to see Thomas and Alito finding against him though.

    I find it very plausible that the majority will reject the idea that the President isn’t an “officer.” The big lynchpin here is whether they agree his conduct constitutes insurrection. The rest is largely procedural (ie the distinction between serving and electing etc).
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,231

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Hysteria in me? It's not hysteria, it's fear.

    In answer to your question, any MAGA candidate that is prepared to a) accept election outcomes, and b) not threaten to lock up his/her opponents would be vastly less of a threat to western democracy.

    Anyone who cannot see the threat Trump poses is frankly as bad as the 1930s Hitler apologists.
    From "it's not hysteria" straight to a Hitler comparison...
    How would you describe someone who threatens to lock up/punish his opponents?

    It's not a healthy thing for a politician to do, is it?
    Trump isn't Hitler but he's obviously a bad'un. Some people don't want to see it for various reasons. It's like Corbyn being unwilling to criticise Maduro.
  • Options
    Lock him up, I’m not sure whether that should be in a prison or an asylum.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,411
    edited January 25

    Nigelb said:

    Haley responds.
    Whether she'll eventually capitulate, like everyone since Ted Cruz and Little Marco, is open to question. But this does sound just a bit like someone deciding fnck it, let's go all in.
    It will certainly get under his skin.

    @NikkiHaley on Trump: He “threw a temper tantrum,” “pitched a fit.” He’s “insecure” and feels “threatened.” “And he should feel threatened.” She calls him “confused” and questions his “mental competency”; He’s running “revenge” and not relevant issues.
    https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1750329672087249127

    Mitt Romney, bless him, hasn’t capitulated to Trump. There’s a few other Republicans who haven’t. Liz Cheney.
    Indeed.

    Haley has to make a choice about her political future. I don't think there's one for her in Trumpworld; there is perhaps a significant one post Trump, if he loses in November.

    There's also the small matter of choosing to do the right thing.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    Hysteria in me? It's not hysteria, it's fear.

    In answer to your question, any MAGA candidate that is prepared to a) accept election outcomes, and b) not threaten to lock up his/her opponents would be vastly less of a threat to western democracy.

    Anyone who cannot see the threat Trump poses is frankly as bad as the 1930s Hitler apologists.
    From "it's not hysteria" straight to a Hitler comparison...
    I mean the comparisons are somewhat apt - the failed beerhall putsch, the targeting of the "other", the claims of a lying press, even his current attempts at using court cases to paint himself as the victim (Hitler did this with great effect). I think Mussolini is probably the better analogy, another strong man media figure who forced his way into power (we now have a kind of patronising view of Mussolini in comparison to Hitler as a joke, but in his time he was the OG fascist and was ruthless too - he just wasn't that interested in a Holocaust of Jewish people).

    I feel people think about fascists and go "that's a uniform and symbol and people marching in lock step" and that was, indeed, fascism of the 20s through to the 50s - but as society has got more individualistic the aesthetics of fascism has changed from a literal uniform to a pseudo uniform (the MAGA hat, the same fascination with shared symbols and signs) that isn't everyone wearing the same outfit but having the same "vibe" with their outfit.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,232

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    I went back and read the January 7th 2021 discussion the other day. It was rottenborough who was the first to say Trump would run again in 2024 and was pilloried for it by people waffling on about how Trump would soon be in jail or bankrupt.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,411
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    The two issues that are a problem for him with the base are vaccines and the J6 prisoners.
    Why so? Vaccines - old news, move along; J6 prisoners - doesn't Trump and his supporters agree they should be pardoned?
    No, vaccines are still huge in Magaworld. Also, Trump could have pardoned all of the J6 freedom fighters in his last few weeks in office but didn't. (In their perception.)
    They're big enough to give the Kennedy grifter his moment, but that's about it.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,232

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    I have a neighbour who parks like that.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,232
    Ghedebrav said:

    algarkirk said:

    Crudely Baxtered the latest YouGov (YG has been fairly consistent for a time in giving the Tories very low figures) would give the Tories about 42 seats. Furthermore, almost all of them would be on wafer thin majorities.

    I mean, this is why the RefUK mini-surge must be terrifying the Tories. They'll leak enough of their nutter vote to let a load of Labour and LD candidates squeak home.
    It would be remarkable karma for the Tories to have delivered an absurd, damaging Brexit and then have the nutters destroy their party by way of thank you.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,263
    IanB2 said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    I have a neighbour who parks like that.
    Range Rover?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,828
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Obviously getting scared, it is far from over and he well knows it.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,232

    IanB2 said:

    Look everyone. Here's some fly tipping on the moon.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68091389

    BBC Science correspondent Jonathan Amos struggles to understand degrees:

    The first picture of the stricken Slim spacecraft shows it rotated 90 degrees from how it should have come to rest.

    (Or was the lander meant to land on its side?)

    image
    I have a neighbour who parks like that.
    Range Rover?
    No, he drives a Volvo SUV. He also has his wife’s old Audi sports car. Both parked diagonally at best, often with a wheel up on the kerb. His wife died suddenly last year and it appears that he is not ready to sell the spare car.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679
    Nigelb said:

    148grss said:

    FPT:

    Trump has released a video on dismantling the deep state:

    https://x.com/leadingreport/status/1750332674701463838

    Trump’s plan to dismantle the ‘Deep State':

    1. Immediately reissue 2020 executive order restoring the president’s authority to remove rogue bureaucrats and wield that power “very aggressively."

    2. Clean out all the corrupt actors in our national security and intelligence apparatus.

    3. Totally reform FISA courts.

    4. Establish a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to declassify and publish all documents on the deep state’s spying, censorship, and corruption.

    5. Launch a major crackdown on government leakers who collude with “fake news to deliberately weave false narratives and subvert our government and democracy.”

    6. Make every inspector general’s office independent and physically separated from the departments they oversee.

    7. Ask Congress to establish an independent auditing system to continually monitor our intelligence agencies.

    8. Continue the effort launched by the Trump administration to move parts of the federal bureaucracy to new locations outside the “Washington Swamp.”

    9. Work to ban federal bureaucrats from taking jobs at the companies they deal with and regulate.

    10. Push a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress.


    Outside of the fact that this is being proposed by Trump and therefore, of course, will mostly be used to deal with his petty grievances rather than increase scrutiny on the executive branch or Congress - these aren't all bad policies even as written. Like 1 and 5 are very questionable, and the invective about "fake news" and "Washington Swamp" are bad - but the overall idea if done in a sincere way would be a boon. A shame it will be imposed by a fascist to make the executive branch more fashy.

    "The overall idea" is what, precisely ?
    You could make a case for 6,8 and 9 - and possibly 3 (though how ?), but the rest would require accepting the paranoid premise.
    More democratic scrutiny of the executive branch - which is not what Trump wants with these proposals, but is what they would mean; much of what he wants to reform are aspects of the state apparatus that practically answer solely to the President.

    2 - I think there are likely "corrupt actors in... national security and intelligence" - I just probably have a different definition of corrupt than you or Trump.
    3 - FISA courts are bad, and the fact that they also target people who do need targeting occasionally is not enough to justify their existence
    4 - I think a public airing of what the intelligence agencies of the US do would be good, although the focus on Trump is indeed a general acceptance of the paranoid premise Trump holds
    7 - Independent scrutiny of the intelligence apparatus, if actually independent, is good.
    10 - A term limit for members of Congress makes sense and would allow for new blood to flow through both parties a lot quicker

    I agree that because Trump is suggesting these things they would, in practice, be bad. Because this is a pretence for a reform of the executive branch to allow Trump to be the dictator he wants. But, if these were sincere policy proposals for executive branch reform from a liberal think tank (for example) I'd think they'd be pretty fair. This is clearly a trap to get Democrats to campaign against these things (and therefore defend the security state apparatus as it currently exists) which is not something many typical Democrats agree with.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,650
    edited January 25
    Pip, I missed your article earlier. Yes nice analysis, and nice to see another @Quincel article. Please keep them coming.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    Dura_Ace said:

    I went back and read the January 7th 2021 discussion the other day. It was rottenborough who was the first to say Trump would run again in 2024 and was pilloried for it by people waffling on about how Trump would soon be in jail or bankrupt.

    Never underestimate the power of wishful thinking (the rest of us, not rottenborough obvs); without it we'd all just give up at birth.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437
    edited January 25
    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,222

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    DODGY DONALD!
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,231
    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    The two issues that are a problem for him with the base are vaccines and the J6 prisoners.
    Why so? Vaccines - old news, move along; J6 prisoners - doesn't Trump and his supporters agree they should be pardoned?
    No, vaccines are still huge in Magaworld. Also, Trump could have pardoned all of the J6 freedom fighters in his last few weeks in office but didn't. (In their perception.)
    They're big enough to give the Kennedy grifter his moment, but that's about it.
    Polls seem to show Kennedy taking a few more votes from Biden than Trump. But West and Stein are only taking votes from Biden (in polling, how many actually vote for them dunno). Not sure if West and Stein don't see Trump as that much of a threat to democracy as many of us do, or whether they are the kind of idiot who thinks things have to get really a lot shitter in order for the revolution to come!
    Or maybe they are just grifters like Kennedy?
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Doing nothing = leaving to the states to decide or preventing the states from banning Trump?

    As it happens. I think they will use the lack of conviction as the deciding factor (probably correctly).
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    He's let them have their fun, but now it's 1 on 1 he doesn't need to keep up the pretence that a race is happening. It's a line in the sand moment that his supporters will see as him showing strength. The argument will go "why keep having this internal conversation when we know Haley isn't going to win and all this money could be spent against Biden". I think it makes a lot of sense.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    DODGY DONALD!
    Meaning?
  • Options
    No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 3,804
    edited January 25

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Walking on to the sound of Radiohead at rallies?
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588

    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
    On that basis, SCOTUS would be themselves be judging whether Trump engaged in insurrection or not. Which is there prerogative I suppose.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679
    Also, have people here discussed Texas essentially arguing that they have the right to declare war on immigrants independent from the federal government? It isn't quite a secessionist move, but it's not not one.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,232

    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
    Yes, but it is a short step to saying that without a conviction it hasn’t been established that someone has engaged.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437

    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
    On that basis, SCOTUS would be themselves be judging whether Trump engaged in insurrection or not. Which is there prerogative I suppose.
    From my understanding, the higher courts should generally defer to the lower courts on findings of fact.

    And the lower courts said he had engaged in insurrection.

    I don’t think that’s insurmountable and they can overrule if they think that is egregiously wrong, but I don’t profess to be an expert.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588
    148grss said:

    Also, have people here discussed Texas essentially arguing that they have the right to declare war on immigrants independent from the federal government? It isn't quite a secessionist move, but it's not not one.

    It was discussed briefly yesterday.

    Putin must be lapping this stuff up.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679

    Nigelb said:

    Haley responds.
    Whether she'll eventually capitulate, like everyone since Ted Cruz and Little Marco, is open to question. But this does sound just a bit like someone deciding fnck it, let's go all in.
    It will certainly get under his skin.

    @NikkiHaley on Trump: He “threw a temper tantrum,” “pitched a fit.” He’s “insecure” and feels “threatened.” “And he should feel threatened.” She calls him “confused” and questions his “mental competency”; He’s running “revenge” and not relevant issues.
    https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1750329672087249127

    Mitt Romney, bless him, hasn’t capitulated to Trump. There’s a few other Republicans who haven’t. Liz Cheney.
    Except when he was running for POTUS himself and begged for The Donald's endorsement. Oh, and when he went to kiss the ring at a dinner where he also supposedly asked to be Secretary of State in the Trump WH and then was unceremoniously ignored.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588

    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
    On that basis, SCOTUS would be themselves be judging whether Trump engaged in insurrection or not. Which is there prerogative I suppose.
    From my understanding, the higher courts should generally defer to the lower courts on findings of fact.

    And the lower courts said he had engaged in insurrection.

    I don’t think that’s insurmountable and they can overrule if they think that is egregiously wrong, but I don’t profess to be an expert.
    Interesting, thanks.

    SCOTUS ruling sometime in February, I believe?
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,907


    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Walking on to the sound of Radiohead at rallies?


    If he dropped out and said vote for Biden I think he'd lose support.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,650
    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    It's in character. He's Brick-Top, only less literate. He doesn't fuck around: you agree with him or he hurts you until you stop. We still think of him as a politician negotiating, where really he's a thug menacing.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,222

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    DODGY DONALD!
    Meaning?
    CROOKED HILLARY!

    NIKKI BIRDBRAIN!

    DODGY DONALD!
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,232
    edited January 25
    rkrkrk said:


    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Walking on to the sound of Radiohead at rallies?
    He could put on a dress, declare himself trans, and pitch to be the first female President. That would surely do it?
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 5,437

    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
    On that basis, SCOTUS would be themselves be judging whether Trump engaged in insurrection or not. Which is there prerogative I suppose.
    From my understanding, the higher courts should generally defer to the lower courts on findings of fact.

    And the lower courts said he had engaged in insurrection.

    I don’t think that’s insurmountable and they can overrule if they think that is egregiously wrong, but I don’t profess to be an expert.
    Interesting, thanks.

    SCOTUS ruling sometime in February, I believe?
    I don’t believe there’s a date for the judgment to be handed down, but there is an accepted view that they’re likely to want to get it out of the way before Super Tuesday (5 March).

    Oral arguments are scheduled for 8 February. A lot can generally, I believe, be gleaned from that session because a judge’s line of questioning can belie what their gut view/feeling is.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,907
    malcolmg said:

    Taz said:

    Leon said:

    It's not so much "nasty", it's more COMPLETELY MENTAL

    This is just bizarre from him.

    Surely he needs to win over Haley's supporters and donors, especially once she is out of the race. Not alienate them.

    It makes little sense from the Trumpdozer.
    Obviously getting scared, it is far from over and he well knows it.
    He's never actually going to turn down donor money. Not a credible threat.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679

    IanB2 said:

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They’re surely just going to duck the issue by using the lack of a conviction to justify doing nothing.
    Problem they have is the wording of the amendment doesn’t say “having been convicted of having engaged in insurrection or rebellion”. The only requirement for the disqualification is that they have engaged.

    And a lot of these right wing judges are quite keen on the idea of going with the plain ordinary literal text rather than reading things into it. Of course it will be interesting to see how much that matters to them in this particular case, when it’s not about restricting rights for minorities and women….
    Please, don't fall for the idea that textualism is in anyway a real legal theory and not just a way for right wingers to find pretext for the outcomes they want. Lots of the most scathing dissents from Sotomayor in recent years have included textualist analysis that she points out makes it clear what the actual text says and pointing to the hypocrisy of the GOP judges, only for those judges to not give a shit because they're winning and can drop the pretext now. Indeed, quite a bit of the right wing legal movement are having a "well, do we really need to keep textualism any more?" moment now they've captured the court because it could hinder their programme.

    They've always hated and ignored the literal text of the 9th Amendment, for example, which is essentially "yo, if we didn't specifically name a right doesn't mean you don't have it" and the right wing argue the literal opposite all the time. Bork literally said interpreting the text, which is pretty clear, would be like trying to interpret what was written underneath "an inkblot".
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 3,679

    I feel like if I was a Republican judge on SCOTUS and he's going around treating Republicans like this and also making veiled threats against court clerks and so forth, I would be thinking, "I would rather this person not be president again as they are likely to cause problems for me, maybe I should not put my thumb on the scale to help him". But then I'm not so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    There is definitely a chance that the Trump appointees will be a lot less loyal to him than he expects. Alito and Thomas probably proper loyal MAGA.
    I think ACB and Kavanaugh might support him on this - the argument that he hasn't been convicted of something sounds like something Kavanaugh especially would be drawn to given his personal grievance. Gorsuch is a weird one; have no idea how he'll feel. I also imagine that Roberts will be on the majority, but only to make sure he gets to write it - if it looks like Trump will get off and Alito or Thomas will be the ones to write the thing, he might join just to write a more specific ruling.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,000
    IanB2 said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    algarkirk said:

    Crudely Baxtered the latest YouGov (YG has been fairly consistent for a time in giving the Tories very low figures) would give the Tories about 42 seats. Furthermore, almost all of them would be on wafer thin majorities.

    I mean, this is why the RefUK mini-surge must be terrifying the Tories. They'll leak enough of their nutter vote to let a load of Labour and LD candidates squeak home.
    It would be remarkable karma for the Tories to have delivered an absurd, damaging Brexit and then have the nutters destroy their party by way of thank you.
    Remarkable karma, but not really surprising. The hunger for 'harder, more extreme' on the right* is an unquenchable positive feedback loop.


    *On the Magic Grandpa left as well.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,222

    It just beggars belief that so many Tory MPs are on the record as wanting Trump to win.

    Not really! Right-wing nutters back right-wing nutter!
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,588

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    DODGY DONALD!
    Meaning?
    CROOKED HILLARY!

    NIKKI BIRDBRAIN!

    DODGY DONALD!
    Ah, I see. I'm afraid 'dodgy' underplays is by a few orders of magnitude.

    Despicable, dopey, dangerous, disastrous, delinquent, or my preferred: deranged... None of them quite do it on their own. All of the above would see to apply.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983

    It just beggars belief that so many Tory MPs are on the record as wanting Trump to win.

    Why? Trump in power would be great for the current nationalist-populist spasm of the tory party. It will also give PM Starmer a party management nightmare when he has to go to DC and rim Trump which would be to their advantage in opposition.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,650

    It just beggars belief that so many Tory MPs are on the record as wanting Trump to win.

    No it doesn't. People live on their phones. It's the same instinct that leads people to come on PB and post things like "why don't you liberals engage with Trumpians" (answer: I'm British and DGAF). Tory MPs have too much money and no sense of proportion and think they're American.
  • Options

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    DODGY DONALD!
    Meaning?
    CROOKED HILLARY!

    NIKKI BIRDBRAIN!

    DODGY DONALD!
    Ah, I see. I'm afraid 'dodgy' underplays is by a few orders of magnitude.

    Despicable, dopey, dangerous, disastrous, delinquent, or my preferred: deranged... None of them quite do it on their own. All of the above would see to apply.
    Why not simply Draft Dodger. It's true, isn't it?

    How do all those MAGA types square that one?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,930

    Question: is there anything Trump could say that would put off his MAGA supporters?

    "I'm a paedophile"?

    "I worship the Devil"?

    "I like pineapple on pizza"?

    Anything?

    Is it Trump you want them to renounce or their political views more generally? Would an alternative MAGA figure trigger less hysteria?
    MAGA is fine. If the people want it, they should get it.

    Overturning the democratic system is not ok.

    And can you really look me in the eye after the fake electors, and tell me he's not a threat to the democratic system?

This discussion has been closed.