I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:
For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.
The same, of course, is true of Biden.
I would just say that upto the 17th October 2023 my health for my age was reasonable, then out of the blue I had a massive DVT which led to lots of tests and the cardiologist verdict my heart was worn out and I need a pacemaker which is due on the 6th February
Biden is only a year or so older so yes, health at our ages cannot be taken for granted
Best wishes for the 6th Feb and beyond Big_G!
Thank you and hopefully it will see me drive again and do jobs I cannot at present
I have been told to go to A & E if I feel unwell, and did so with chest pains at 2.00am on the 9th January, but this is our A & E which makes one genuinely hope it is not needed
I would just say this was our experience of the time our practice sent me direct to this A & E as a medical emergency
Amidst speculation about Rishi Sunak’s leadership of the Conservative party, it is noted that no strong alternative stands out amongst 2019 Conservative voters. In fact, favourability figures for Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson are virtually identical (42% and 43% respectively) with Johnson registering higher unfavourable figures. Meanwhile, 38% of 2019 Conservative voters are favourable towards Chancellor Jeremy Hunt and 28% towards Home Secretary James Cleverly.
Brazil joined the allies in 1942, and even eventually provided some troops for service in Italy. (The bases they provided were probably their most import contribution.)
The Chinese, meanwhile, irritably point out that it began on 18th September 1931;
Drawing a line is hard, but that wasn't the full scale warfare that broke out in 37. If we're just talking about forcible expansion of their empire, the annexation of Korea predated that by a good two decades.
I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:
For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.
The same, of course, is true of Biden.
According to this, the chance of dying within a year for someone aged 80 is 5.8%.
Yes, but unlikely to have an impact until winter 25/26 as there is plenty of permitted LNG export for now.
Bad for my GTT shareholding, mind
Who is to say he won’t block the exports? He has screwed Europe once to appease his green lobby, why wouldn’t he do it again to please them a second time.
What a great gift for Russia. I bet they are really looking at this and thinking “wow, the U.S. is really committed to Europe”
I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.
I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.
I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.
And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?
My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:
Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.
Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.
At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
I'm inclined to agree.
For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.
But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.
Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.
Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.
At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
When Hillary lost, her consolation prize was as a visiting lecturer at Swansea University. Which University do we think Trump could get a gig with when he loses?
My prediction that Boris would pick up an American moosehead chair in Classics was clearly wrong!
Haley’s changed her stump here in SC. Gone are the bio riffs — people know the 2x Fmr SC gov — and instead she’s going at Trump for his revenge-centered remarks in NH, his mental fitness, and demanding he debate her. “Bring it, Donald! Show me what you got.” https://twitter.com/alivitali/status/1750313352947962250
I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.
I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.
I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.
And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?
My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:
Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.
Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.
At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
I'm inclined to agree.
For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.
But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.
Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.
Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.
At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
When Hillary lost, her consolation prize was as a visiting lecturer at Swansea University. Which University do we think Trump could get a gig with when he loses?
Trump University?
He could of course always re-purpose the unused graduation certificate pro-formas whilst in the bathroom at Mar-a-Lago. Useful for when he runs out of usable classified documents.
The Business School at Oxford. I can't think he'd accept anything else.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
Ukrainian Defense Forces: there were no prisoners of war on board the Il-76. “Several times a day, this plane delivers ammunition to the front. This is their proven route, along which they deliver not only ammunition, but also S-300s at least three times a day. We are sure that there were no prisoners there."
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
Ukrainian Defense Forces: there were no prisoners of war on board the Il-76. “Several times a day, this plane delivers ammunition to the front. This is their proven route, along which they deliver not only ammunition, but also S-300s at least three times a day. We are sure that there were no prisoners there."
Some of the claimed POW fatalities have already returned to Ukraine in prisoner exchanges.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
Jonathan Coad, a media lawyer and commentator, threatened to issue a preliminary letter for a libel claim against the Conservative peer. In a letter seen by the Guardian, he accused her and her husband of having “abused the hard-won reputation and standing that I enjoyed in the media industry by instructing me repeatedly to disseminate lies”...
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
Jonathan Coad, a media lawyer and commentator, threatened to issue a preliminary letter for a libel claim against the Conservative peer. In a letter seen by the Guardian, he accused her and her husband of having “abused the hard-won reputation and standing that I enjoyed in the media industry by instructing me repeatedly to disseminate lies”...
I don't get the 49%. Ignoring everything else we are probably talking 50/50 but then we have 2 cases that he will lose that could cripple him financially (defamation and fraud) and several cases that could land him in prison. On top of that we have the problem of getting on the ballot for the Republican primaries and election. He has to pass all those hurdles and even then not get hit in the polls as a consequence before the 50/50 odds come into play.
I think that, with appeals and the like, it's looking unlikely that any of the cases brought against Trump will conclude before the end of the year. Even being in the dock would have destroyed any other candidate's chances, but Trump's relationship with his supporters is impervious to these considerations.
I'm doubtful that the courts will stop Trump from running.
And Trump wasn't all that far off winning the last election, and he's polling better now than he was then. Is it really 50-50 if we get to polling day and it's Trump v Biden on the ballot, with the same polling numbers that we see now?
My mind rebels at the very idea of Trump becoming President again. But despite everything he's still in the race.
The matter narrows down to two central questions only: These are my predictions about them:
Will some process actually prevent him by law from being on the ballot? No.
Will Trump prevail in the 5 or 6 key swing states. Yes.
At the moment I think all the other questions are sub-questions and attention is best focussed on the central matters. It is now clear that nothing Trump does or is convicted of etc will make a difference to the core of voters. If that were the case it would already have occurred.
I'm inclined to agree.
For the last few years I've felt that 2024 was going to be a re-run of 2020. Trump v Biden, with Biden prevailing as the best Democrat candidate for defeating Trump.
But I now think that it's a re-run of 2016. Trump v a weak Democrat candidate that the Democrat party won't replace because of a feeling that they deserve the nomination.
Everyone now agrees that Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016, but at the time the party was incapable of choosing anyone else. I fear that when Trump wins in November it won't be long until everyone says of Biden that it was obvious he was going to lose with his awful polling numbers, and wonder why the Democrats didn't pick someone else as their nominee.
To be fair, lots of us agreed Hilary was an awful candidate for the Democrats in 2016 at the time too.
Supremely arrogant and self-entitled. And with very little sense of humour on top.
She nonetheless won the popular vote against a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour.
And since then, shown to be a supremely arrogant, entitled candidate with no sense of humour who refused to concede he was a loser. And prepared to overturn democratic norms to boot.
At least if he loses, Biden won't try to drag the edifice of democracy down with him.
When Hillary lost, her consolation prize was as a visiting lecturer at Swansea University. Which University do we think Trump could get a gig with when he loses?
Ukrainian Defense Forces: there were no prisoners of war on board the Il-76. “Several times a day, this plane delivers ammunition to the front. This is their proven route, along which they deliver not only ammunition, but also S-300s at least three times a day. We are sure that there were no prisoners there."
Some of the claimed POW fatalities have already returned to Ukraine in prisoner exchanges.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
The EU are meeting next week and want agreement on 50 billion. Orban blocked this last December and the majority of EU leaders are utterly sick of him . Talk now that the EU could use the nuclear option if he continues to arse lick Putin.
The EU are meeting next week and want agreement on 50 billion. Orban blocked this last December and the majority of EU leaders are utterly sick of him . Talk now that the EU could use the nuclear option if he continues to arse lick Putin.
The EU are meeting next week and want agreement on 50 billion. Orban blocked this last December and the majority of EU leaders are utterly sick of him . Talk now that the EU could use the nuclear option if he continues to arse lick Putin.
That’s a bit harsh. There are some nice buildings in Budapest it would be a shame to destroy.
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Up to a dozen former special advisers, who honed their strategic skills in the governments of Theresa May, Boris Johnson or Liz Truss, have teamed up with “a group of around ten Tory MPs” to oust Sunak. Although the rule of political exaggeration means “around ten” is probably “five”. And at least two of those are because someone thought lanky Simon Clarke was actually several people on each other’s shoulders hidden under a trenchcoat.
Not a single one of these desperate rearguard attacks by Sunak-friendly figures have mentioned a good reason why he should be kept. Just ridiculing the 'plotters'. At least Clarke had the cojones to say publicly what everyone has been saying on Whatsapp or in private conversations for months. Good for him. And I love how he's become 'lanky' just by virtue it seems of standing next to Sunak. Perhaps we're all lanky. If only we could all be blessed with the newly desirable height of 3ft2.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
The EU are meeting next week and want agreement on 50 billion. Orban blocked this last December and the majority of EU leaders are utterly sick of him . Talk now that the EU could use the nuclear option if he continues to arse lick Putin.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
Hmm. I think baby logic is too advanced for you. Perhaps you should become a member of the government.
Up to a dozen former special advisers, who honed their strategic skills in the governments of Theresa May, Boris Johnson or Liz Truss, have teamed up with “a group of around ten Tory MPs” to oust Sunak. Although the rule of political exaggeration means “around ten” is probably “five”. And at least two of those are because someone thought lanky Simon Clarke was actually several people on each other’s shoulders hidden under a trenchcoat.
Not a single one of these desperate rearguard attacks by Sunak-friendly figures have mentioned a good reason why he should be kept. Just ridiculing the 'plotters'. At least Clarke had the cojones to say publicly what everyone has been saying on Whatsapp or in private conversations for months. Good for him. And I love how he's become 'lanky' just by virtue it seems of standing next to Sunak. Perhaps we're all lanky. If only we could all be blessed with the newly desirable height of 3ft2.
Mr Clarke is 201 cm tall (oh, all right, 6' 7" or however many barleycorns it is). A quick check suggests that that's about the 99.9th percentile.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Think you forgot Ohio.
OK but Brown has already won 3 terms there so clearly has some personal popularity in the state
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Going by the posters on here, I think that's rubbish. It's like Boris: he got the call on Ukraine right, at a very important moment. Many people on all sides seem to agree on that. But that doesn't mean they need to think he was a good PM; it was just a good call in what they might otherwise see as a terrible PMship.
If Trump goes full on backing Ukraine; good on him. I don't hold out much hope for that, though. And it won't make him a good person, or president. Just a good call.
(A good call Trump made was putting Bridenstine in charge of NASA. I can acknowledge that and still think he was a terrible president.)
On topic, I think evens is about right for Trump. Legal issues is more likely to be a problem than health, now there are not much more than 9 months to polling day (albeit stressful and demanding months). I'd be less confident about his chances of making it through to Jan 2029.
Biden remains the value bet. He should also be well up into the 40s. It really is just those two, miles ahead of the field.
I’m almost in agreement. I’d say the odds are 11/9 in Biden’s favour.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
That’s complete shite. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, normal people would respond exactly how they responded to Boris fully supporting Ukraine: by saying good on him. But still hating him for all the other stuff.
Pg. 15: “Trump has now abandoned his argument that the January 6 attack was not an ‘insurrection’ against ‘the Constitution of the United States’ for purposes of Section 3.” See pages 33-38 of Trump’s SCOTUS brief.
The other point to mention on current polls is that the Conservative vote variance is 9% (Savanta vs YouGov) whilst Labour is only 4% (Savanta vs YouGov and We Think).
We are likely to have Opinium this weekend and their polls are consistently lower for Labour than the six polling companies included in my average.
In fact Opinium is consistently polling Labour lower by a similar percentage as YouGov is consistently polling Conservatives compared with average.
Much turns on Reform. The lower the Reform share, the higher the Conservatives’ and vice versa.
Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.
Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.
And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?
I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.
'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)
Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
Porridge.
Made with milk, with added sultanas or dates. No need for any white or brown crystals.
Jumbo oats, ideally.
Don't add fresh blueberries, as purple porridge is a bit off-putting.
Do we now have, encouraged by the supreme intellects of our time such as David Frost and Jacob Rees-Mogg, people in PB who actually think Trump is OK and not an utter narcissistic shit?
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:
For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.
The same, of course, is true of Biden.
According to this, the chance of dying within a year for someone aged 80 is 5.8%.
But there are plenty of health issues that fall far short of dying that can incapacitate you.
Trump is going to have to deal with the stress of a large cheque written out for his defamation case. Then his New York property empire disbanded and a lifetime ban from being a property fraudster magnate in New York - and a humongous cheque to the state for that fraud.
That's going to take a toll. At the very least, it is going to cause a worldwide block caps shortage as he vents his spleen...
He also faces more rounds of defamations cases from the same woman he has continued to defame on the courthouse steps during this trial.
And I don't see why all those officials he has abused - "Deranged" Jack Smith, Letitia "Peekaboo" James, and all the others - should not sue him for defamation, too.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
Using your baby logic, please explain why the COVID-19 crisis occurred 3 and a half months after Boris Johnson's magnificent landslide election win.Very suspicious.
Pg. 15: “Trump has now abandoned his argument that the January 6 attack was not an ‘insurrection’ against ‘the Constitution of the United States’ for purposes of Section 3.” See pages 33-38 of Trump’s SCOTUS brief.
Nikki Haley on Friday called Donald J. Trump “totally unhinged” after a failed attempt by one of his allies to push the Republican National Committee to declare him the party’s presumptive nominee, escalating her attacks on his mental acuity.
NY Times
If only it would make any difference whatsoever...
Do we now have, encouraged by the supreme intellects of our time such as David Frost and Jacob Rees-Mogg, people in PB who actually think Trump is OK and not an utter narcissistic shit?
Not me.
He's a clear and present danger to the republic as a functioning democracy.
Frankly if they are stupid enough to elect him they'll never get him out again.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
Using your baby logic, please explain why the COVID-19 crisis occurred 3 and a half months after Boris Johnson's magnificent landslide election win.Very suspicious.
Baby logic says that the virus didn’t know who the British PM was, but Putin did know who the US President was. In fact they met in a big summit meeting and Putin obviously came away emboldened rather than deflated.
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Montana and WV give control to the Republicans.
Of course Harris would also read out the EC results before the new Senate is inaugrated even if the GOP gain it so it wouldn't affect the presidential election outcome either. If 50-50 she gets the casting vote in the new Senate too
Do we now have, encouraged by the supreme intellects of our time such as David Frost and Jacob Rees-Mogg, people in PB who actually think Trump is OK and not an utter narcissistic shit?
Not me.
He's a clear and present danger to the republic as a functioning democracy.
Frankly if they are stupid enough to elect him they'll never get him out again.
Only if the army back him which they didn't in Jan 2021 and of course he will die eventually
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
That’s complete shite. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, normal people would respond exactly how they responded to Boris fully supporting Ukraine: by saying good on him. But still hating him for all the other stuff.
Nope, it’s not. There are a fair few people on here who judge the person, not the action. The LNG ban by Biden is an example. Anyone who is pro-Ukraine should be appalled by this, as much for the signal as for the effects. Yet, because it’s Biden, we get the usual silence / “it’s not really an issue”
I think everyone is underestimating the health risk:
For people in their late 70s, particularly ones under great stress, poor diet, overweight, no exercise, etc., the chances of something going wrong - cancer, dementia, heart attack, etc -have to be at least 10% in any given year.
The same, of course, is true of Biden.
I agree. The life expectancy of an average male American male aged 77 is 8.7 years i.e. 100 months. It's 10 months until the election so that suggest (on a linear basis) a 10% chance that Trump will die.
However he is grossly overweight, under enormous stress from court cases, campaigning and losing family support. He's also showing signs of TIAs in his increasingly incoherent speeches. Say a 15% chance he will expire.
In addition he may become so obviously ill without dying, and/or be convicted or otherwise thwarted that I think his chances of standing are much less than 80%.
In addition it appears that the polls are overstating his support compared with actual (secret) ballots in Iowa and New Hampshire.
I think his chances of winning the Presidency are less than 30%. But that is still worryingly high.
I don’t know who’s going to win. 49% chance for Trump feels about right. The value is in Biden. 37% is too low, while 5% for M Obama and ~7% for everyone else is way too high.
Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.
Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.
And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?
I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.
'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)
Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
Porridge.
Made with milk, with added sultanas or dates. No need for any white or brown crystals.
Jumbo oats, ideally.
Don't add fresh blueberries, as purple porridge is a bit off-putting.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.
Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.
And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
40% are shocked. 40% are relieved 20% are watching Love Island
10% are shocked 10% are relieved 60% are watching Love Island 20% are wondering how they we going to afford their healthcare bills
Jonathan Coad, a media lawyer and commentator, threatened to issue a preliminary letter for a libel claim against the Conservative peer. In a letter seen by the Guardian, he accused her and her husband of having “abused the hard-won reputation and standing that I enjoyed in the media industry by instructing me repeatedly to disseminate lies”...
Mr Chump has tried that defence.
"Advice of lawyers."
In order to make that stick he has to waive his right of client confidentiality to prove that the advice caused his problems.
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Think you forgot Ohio.
OK but Brown has already won 3 terms there so clearly has some personal popularity in the state
You could say the say about Tester and Manchin so I don’t think that is a differential point.
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Think you forgot Ohio.
OK but Brown has already won 3 terms there so clearly has some personal popularity in the state
You could say the say about Tester and Manchin so I don’t think that is a differential point.
Manchin isn't standing again, Brown and Tester are
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
That’s complete shite. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, normal people would respond exactly how they responded to Boris fully supporting Ukraine: by saying good on him. But still hating him for all the other stuff.
Nope, it’s not. There are a fair few people on here who judge the person, not the action. The LNG ban by Biden is an example. Anyone who is pro-Ukraine should be appalled by this, as much for the signal as for the effects. Yet, because it’s Biden, we get the usual silence / “it’s not really an issue”
So you’re seriously arguing that if Trump went all in supporting Ukraine, pro Ukraine people on here would go pro Putin? Give over.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Going by the posters on here, I think that's rubbish. It's like Boris: he got the call on Ukraine right, at a very important moment. Many people on all sides seem to agree on that. But that doesn't mean they need to think he was a good PM; it was just a good call in what they might otherwise see as a terrible PMship.
If Trump goes full on backing Ukraine; good on him. I don't hold out much hope for that, though. And it won't make him a good person, or president. Just a good call.
(A good call Trump made was putting Bridenstine in charge of NASA. I can acknowledge that and still think he was a terrible president.)
But that’s not really what we are talking about here. What we are talking about is Biden taking a decision that is entirely detrimental to Europe’s backing of Ukraine and the utter silence of people on here who are normally so pro-Ukraine to condemn him. To use your Boris analogy, people who are pro-Biden can condemn the action but still support Biden. But they don’t - they can’t even bring themselves to criticise something that is clearly negative to what is happening.
Which to me suggests their loathing for Trump / desperation not to criticise Biden is a greater concern for them over the support of Ukraine.
Jonathan Coad, a media lawyer and commentator, threatened to issue a preliminary letter for a libel claim against the Conservative peer. In a letter seen by the Guardian, he accused her and her husband of having “abused the hard-won reputation and standing that I enjoyed in the media industry by instructing me repeatedly to disseminate lies”...
Mone and her bidey in don’t have a reputation to damage.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
The fact you think Trump is the better candidate whilst supporting Ukraine is bizarre . The two don’t marry . How will you feel if Trump pulls the plug on Ukraine?
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Montana and WV give control to the Republicans.
Of course Harris would also read out the EC results before the new Senate is inaugrated even if the GOP gain it so it wouldn't affect the presidential election outcome either. If 50-50 she gets the casting vote in the new Senate too
The Republicans currently hold 49 seats. If they gain two, they gain control, even if Harris is VP.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
That’s complete shite. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, normal people would respond exactly how they responded to Boris fully supporting Ukraine: by saying good on him. But still hating him for all the other stuff.
Nope, it’s not. There are a fair few people on here who judge the person, not the action. The LNG ban by Biden is an example. Anyone who is pro-Ukraine should be appalled by this, as much for the signal as for the effects. Yet, because it’s Biden, we get the usual silence / “it’s not really an issue”
So you’re seriously arguing that if Trump went all in supporting Ukraine, pro Ukraine people on here would go pro Putin? Give over.
How many usually so vocal pro-Ukraine backers who are also anti-Trump have condemned Biden for what is clearly a very negative move given the situation in Ukraine? Zero as far as I can see. So it’s not as far out as you make it.
I wonder if there's more value in the downballot races? What chance that the Democrats might regain the House?
As goes the Presidency, so goes the House, I suspect.
The Republicans are almost certain to take the Senate, however, given the nature of the seats that are being contested.
The Senate seats up this year held by Democrats are all in states Biden won in 2024 bar Montana and WV (which alone would not be enough for GOP control), so if the Democrats hold the Presidency they likely hold the Senate too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
Think you forgot Ohio.
OK but Brown has already won 3 terms there so clearly has some personal popularity in the state
You could say the say about Tester and Manchin so I don’t think that is a differential point.
Manchin isn't standing again, Brown and Tester are
Ok. But then Tester is so what’s the difference between Brown and Tester (especially as Tester is in a more Red state)?
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
The fact you think Trump is the better candidate whilst supporting Ukraine is bizarre . The two don’t marry . How will you feel if Trump pulls the plug on Ukraine?
I’ve said before I would vehemently disagree with him and would not support him if he did.
Theresa May was after strong and stable leadership – what you’ve got here is strong and stable polling. Labour remaining on top of the pile at the end of January with a 24 point lead. 🔴 Lab 47% (-1) 🔵 Con 23% (NC) 🟠 LD 9% (NC) ⚪ Ref 12% (+2) 🟢 Green 6% (+1) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
The LDs need to do something before they get overtaken by the Greens as well.
If the Green vote overtakes the LibDem one, the LibDems will still win more seats than the Greens + Reform UK. That’s the “gift” of FPTP.
Do we now have, encouraged by the supreme intellects of our time such as David Frost and Jacob Rees-Mogg, people in PB who actually think Trump is OK and not an utter narcissistic shit?
Not me.
He's a clear and present danger to the republic as a functioning democracy.
Frankly if they are stupid enough to elect him they'll never get him out again.
Only if the army back him which they didn't in Jan 2021 and of course he will die eventually
From your post, I would like to replace the word “eventually “ with the word “soon”. I would like to, but unfortunately, I can’t.
Theresa May was after strong and stable leadership – what you’ve got here is strong and stable polling. Labour remaining on top of the pile at the end of January with a 24 point lead. 🔴 Lab 47% (-1) 🔵 Con 23% (NC) 🟠 LD 9% (NC) ⚪ Ref 12% (+2) 🟢 Green 6% (+1) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
The LDs need to do something before they get overtaken by the Greens as well.
If the Green vote overtakes the LibDem one, the LibDems will still win more seats than the Greens + Reform UK. That’s the “gift” of FPTP.
I have always assumed Orkney and Shetland has been liberal since the birth of voting, but I did a quick look at they actually elected a Tory in 1930s.
Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.
Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.
And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?
I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.
'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)
Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
Porridge.
Made with milk, with added sultanas or dates. No need for any white or brown crystals.
Jumbo oats, ideally.
Don't add fresh blueberries, as purple porridge is a bit off-putting.
Cranberries.
Porridge with cranberries is food for the gods.
I always make a large excess of cranberry sauce (with whisky, cinnamon, cloves & allspice) at Christmas for just that reason. Goes well with a lot of stuff - and keeps pretty well a whole year if refrigerated.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
TBF, had Trump defeated Biden , Russian casualties would have been much lower. But I'm not sure how much of Ukraine would be left.
Jonathan Coad, a media lawyer and commentator, threatened to issue a preliminary letter for a libel claim against the Conservative peer. In a letter seen by the Guardian, he accused her and her husband of having “abused the hard-won reputation and standing that I enjoyed in the media industry by instructing me repeatedly to disseminate lies”...
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
The fact you think Trump is the better candidate whilst supporting Ukraine is bizarre . The two don’t marry . How will you feel if Trump pulls the plug on Ukraine?
I’ve said before I would vehemently disagree with him and would not support him if he did.
I wouldn’t trust any American politician to support Ukraine, Europe, which includes us, needs to support Ukraine. Russia isn’t going to invade the USA. Europe can’t be so confident.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
That’s complete shite. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, normal people would respond exactly how they responded to Boris fully supporting Ukraine: by saying good on him. But still hating him for all the other stuff.
Nope, it’s not. There are a fair few people on here who judge the person, not the action. The LNG ban by Biden is an example. Anyone who is pro-Ukraine should be appalled by this, as much for the signal as for the effects. Yet, because it’s Biden, we get the usual silence / “it’s not really an issue”
So you’re seriously arguing that if Trump went all in supporting Ukraine, pro Ukraine people on here would go pro Putin? Give over.
How many usually so vocal pro-Ukraine backers who are also anti-Trump have condemned Biden for what is clearly a very negative move given the situation in Ukraine? Zero as far as I can see. So it’s not as far out as you make it.
Let's see what the price of LNG is next week before we jump to such a conclusion.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
The fact you think Trump is the better candidate whilst supporting Ukraine is bizarre . The two don’t marry . How will you feel if Trump pulls the plug on Ukraine?
I’ve said before I would vehemently disagree with him and would not support him if he did.
I wouldn’t trust any American politician to support Ukraine, Europe, which includes us, needs to support Ukraine. Russia isn’t going to invade the USA. Europe can’t be so confident.
A lot of red herrings on here. Everybody knows that it's Gordon Brown's fault that Putin invaded Ukraine. And we know that because it can't have been Starmer. He was no longer DPP by then.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
TBF, had Trump defeated Biden , Russian casualties would have been much lower. But I'm not sure how much of Ukraine would be left.
According to the Washington Post feature by a Ukrainian journalist, it was Boris Johnson's support that was militarily more significant before the invasion. Did you vote for him?
As the United States shut down its embassy in Kyiv ahead of the invasion, it did ship some weapons to great fanfare, such as Javelin antitank missiles. But the quantity was puny: only about 90 Javelins, according to Danilov. Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, while also briefed about the hopelessness of the Ukrainian cause, had overruled internal objections and authorized a heftier load of about 2,000 NLAW missiles.
Theresa May was after strong and stable leadership – what you’ve got here is strong and stable polling. Labour remaining on top of the pile at the end of January with a 24 point lead. 🔴 Lab 47% (-1) 🔵 Con 23% (NC) 🟠 LD 9% (NC) ⚪ Ref 12% (+2) 🟢 Green 6% (+1) 🟡 SNP 2% (-1)
The LDs need to do something before they get overtaken by the Greens as well.
If the Green vote overtakes the LibDem one, the LibDems will still win more seats than the Greens + Reform UK. That’s the “gift” of FPTP.
I have always assumed Orkney and Shetland has been liberal since the birth of voting, but I did a quick look at they actually elected a Tory in 1930s.
Now Orkney and Shetland is effectively the only safe LD seat.
The only Westminster seat the Liberals/LDs have held at every general election since 1950
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
The fact you think Trump is the better candidate whilst supporting Ukraine is bizarre . The two don’t marry . How will you feel if Trump pulls the plug on Ukraine?
I’ve said before I would vehemently disagree with him and would not support him if he did.
I wouldn’t trust any American politician to support Ukraine, Europe, which includes us, needs to support Ukraine. Russia isn’t going to invade the USA. Europe can’t be so confident.
Russia is closer to Alaska than London
Uninhabited parts of Russia are close to uninhabited parts of Alaska. Russia borders inhabited parts of Europe.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
TBF, had Trump defeated Biden , Russian casualties would have been much lower. But I'm not sure how much of Ukraine would be left.
According to the Washington Post feature by a Ukrainian journalist, it was Boris Johnson's support that was militarily more significant before the invasion. Did you vote for him?
As the United States shut down its embassy in Kyiv ahead of the invasion, it did ship some weapons to great fanfare, such as Javelin antitank missiles. But the quantity was puny: only about 90 Javelins, according to Danilov. Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, while also briefed about the hopelessness of the Ukrainian cause, had overruled internal objections and authorized a heftier load of about 2,000 NLAW missiles.
So given that why is Johnson now on team Trump ?
Why can anyone who truly supports Ukraine be willing to risk a Trump Presidency ?
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
That’s complete shite. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, normal people would respond exactly how they responded to Boris fully supporting Ukraine: by saying good on him. But still hating him for all the other stuff.
Nope, it’s not. There are a fair few people on here who judge the person, not the action. The LNG ban by Biden is an example. Anyone who is pro-Ukraine should be appalled by this, as much for the signal as for the effects. Yet, because it’s Biden, we get the usual silence / “it’s not really an issue”
So you’re seriously arguing that if Trump went all in supporting Ukraine, pro Ukraine people on here would go pro Putin? Give over.
How many usually so vocal pro-Ukraine backers who are also anti-Trump have condemned Biden for what is clearly a very negative move given the situation in Ukraine? Zero as far as I can see. So it’s not as far out as you make it.
Let's see what the price of LNG is next week before we jump to such a conclusion.
1) What is projected American LNG production in the next few years? 2) How much of that is exportable to Europe (location)? 3) How much (if any) will be restricted from export to Europe by not building the Louisiana terminal? 4) When would it come on line - how many years from now?
So at some future point, the Louisiana terminal might or might not allow further growth in LNG exports to Europe. How much and when?
A lot of red herrings on here. Everybody knows that it's Gordon Brown's fault that Putin invaded Ukraine. And we know that because it can't have been Starmer. He was no longer DPP by then.
I thought it was Ed Davey’s fault because he asked Putin to invade Ukraine to divert attention from the Post Office scandal.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
TBF, had Trump defeated Biden , Russian casualties would have been much lower. But I'm not sure how much of Ukraine would be left.
According to the Washington Post feature by a Ukrainian journalist, it was Boris Johnson's support that was militarily more significant before the invasion. Did you vote for him?
As the United States shut down its embassy in Kyiv ahead of the invasion, it did ship some weapons to great fanfare, such as Javelin antitank missiles. But the quantity was puny: only about 90 Javelins, according to Danilov. Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, while also briefed about the hopelessness of the Ukrainian cause, had overruled internal objections and authorized a heftier load of about 2,000 NLAW missiles.
So given that why is Johnson now on team Trump ?
Why can anyone who truly supports Ukraine be willing to risk a Trump Presidency ?
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
TBF, had Trump defeated Biden , Russian casualties would have been much lower. But I'm not sure how much of Ukraine would be left.
According to the Washington Post feature by a Ukrainian journalist, it was Boris Johnson's support that was militarily more significant before the invasion. Did you vote for him?
As the United States shut down its embassy in Kyiv ahead of the invasion, it did ship some weapons to great fanfare, such as Javelin antitank missiles. But the quantity was puny: only about 90 Javelins, according to Danilov. Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, while also briefed about the hopelessness of the Ukrainian cause, had overruled internal objections and authorized a heftier load of about 2,000 NLAW missiles.
Let's see if some of America starts paying attention when the court cases start going against Trump. May have a number from the jury later today in the defamation case. Will have the New York number by month end.
Then we have the financial penalty for being a rapist and a fraudster. If America is inclined to ignore those outcomes, then let's see what they make of the Supreme Court rulings.
And what do Americans think about the Supreme Court ruling against Texas?
You are an educated guy with no skin in the game, so why are you shilling for Trump?
I am assuming you live in the UK, and I am equally sure you are aware that should Trump exit NATO and throw Ukraine to Putin, defending Europe including the UK becomes very much more expensive in terms of cash and manpower.
As one gets older there are few greater pleasures in life than trolling the libs.
I merely mentioned how nice Linda McCartney sausages are, and set the PB Blimps off all day.
'The English Breakfast Society, which is dedicated to the history, heritage, and culture of the English breakfast, said pineapple had been eaten with a full English breakfast in centuries past and has called for it to replace the grilled tomatoes and mushrooms with which modern diners are familiar.[...] “A slice of grilled pineapple can add variety to the English breakfast plate. Simply swap the mushrooms or tomato for a grilled pineapple slice in someone’s English breakfast one day to give them a surprising and unexpected delight.”'
Don't do that! Cooked tomatoes are a natural defence against an enlarged prostate. Prince Charles take note. (He had a visit from the Queen and visited the Princess of Wales today- did he attend a seance?)
Anyway, porridge, salt or sugar?
Porridge.
Made with milk, with added sultanas or dates. No need for any white or brown crystals.
Jumbo oats, ideally.
Don't add fresh blueberries, as purple porridge is a bit off-putting.
Cranberries.
Porridge with cranberries is food for the gods.
I always make a large excess of cranberry sauce (with whisky, cinnamon, cloves & allspice) at Christmas for just that reason. Goes well with a lot of stuff - and keeps pretty well a whole year if refrigerated.
Cranberry sauce with whisky?
Hmm. Interesting. My recipe uses port. Think I might try yours next year.
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
No.
It was 8 months after a summit meeting with Biden that Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It didn't happen on Trump's watch.
And ?
How can you reconcile those facts with your view that we are safer with Biden?
You need a course in baby logic.
I've attended the baby logic course and now I think I get it.
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
I think that sort of logic leap is one of the prime symptoms of TDS. It just goes to show that when many of these posters claim they care about Ukraine and the West etc, they actually don’t. If Trump went full on supporting Ukraine, they would quickly switch to backing Russia and / or discussing the ‘complexities’ of the situation .
Really ! No ones ever said Biden was beyond criticism but the fact is he wants to support Ukraine and Trump will happily throw the country under a bus .
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
And I while heartedly support Ukraine and have from day 1.
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
The fact you think Trump is the better candidate whilst supporting Ukraine is bizarre . The two don’t marry . How will you feel if Trump pulls the plug on Ukraine?
I’ve said before I would vehemently disagree with him and would not support him if he did.
I wouldn’t trust any American politician to support Ukraine, Europe, which includes us, needs to support Ukraine. Russia isn’t going to invade the USA. Europe can’t be so confident.
Russia is closer to Alaska than London
Uninhabited parts of Russia are close to uninhabited parts of Alaska. Russia borders inhabited parts of Europe.
It would probably be easier for Russia to capture Alaska than say Poland.
There are less than 50,000 US troops in Alaska, compared to 300,000 Polish troops in Poland and 10,000 US troops and other NATO troops there
Comments
I have been told to go to A & E if I feel unwell, and did so with chest pains at 2.00am on the 9th January, but this is our A & E which makes one genuinely hope it is not needed
I would just say this was our experience of the time our practice sent me direct to this A & E as a medical emergency
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/patient-74-waited-over-36-28512182#ICID=Android_DailyPostNewsApp_AppShare
"Donald Trump walks out of court during E Jean Carroll defamation trial"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68109999
Amidst speculation about Rishi Sunak’s leadership of the Conservative party, it is noted that no strong alternative stands out amongst 2019 Conservative voters. In fact, favourability figures for Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson are virtually identical (42% and 43% respectively) with Johnson registering higher unfavourable figures. Meanwhile, 38% of 2019 Conservative voters are favourable towards Chancellor Jeremy Hunt and 28% towards Home Secretary James Cleverly.
https://www.axios.com/local/denver/2024/01/26/lauren-boebert-carpetbagger-debate-4th-district-colorado
If we're just talking about forcible expansion of their empire, the annexation of Korea predated that by a good two decades.
https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2024-01/ipsos-political-pulse-gb-january-2024-charts.pdf
But, and it's a big but, there are at least 4 months between then and the official start of the Presidency, so the risk profile is longer.
He is an exceptional manager and Liverpool may well struggle to find someone who can match Klopps achievements
Manchester United still haven't found a worthy successor to Alex Ferguson
What a great gift for Russia. I bet they are really looking at this and thinking “wow, the U.S. is really committed to Europe”
Good old Joe Biden - what a useless tool.
Haley’s changed her stump here in SC. Gone are the bio riffs — people know the 2x Fmr SC gov — and instead she’s going at Trump for his revenge-centered remarks in NH, his mental fitness, and demanding he debate her. “Bring it, Donald! Show me what you got.”
https://twitter.com/alivitali/status/1750313352947962250
He's absolutely fine with chaos at the border for the next ten months.
His party will most likely comply.
Tension grows among Republicans: Accept an immigration compromise, or kill it?
TRUMP is pushing Rs to reject it. SPK JOHNSON is also angling against it.
McCONNELL still favors it. ROMNEY call Trump's demand "appalling."
If it dies, aid to Ukraine + Israel + Gaza refugees dies.
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1750931858672525672
https://x.com/ryanmaue/status/1750596642233872593
NY Times on how White House arrived at decision to delay U.S. LNG terminal CP2 in Louisiana:
"Ahead of the decision, White House climate advisers met with activists like Alex Haraus, a 25-year-old Colorado social media influencer who has led a TikTok and Instagram campaign aimed at urging young voters to demand that Mr. Biden reject the project."
Not a controversial decision at all in the White House, of course. "Little division."
there were no prisoners of war on board the Il-76.
“Several times a day, this plane delivers ammunition to the front.
This is their proven route, along which they deliver not only ammunition, but also S-300s at least three times a day.
We are sure that there were no prisoners there."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/26/michelle-mone-former-lawyer-says-he-wants-apology-damage-to-reputation
Michelle Mone’s former lawyer is demanding that she apologise and make a donation to a charity for allegedly inflicting “severe and irreparable damage” to his reputation by suggesting he had advised her to tell lies.
Jonathan Coad, a media lawyer and commentator, threatened to issue a preliminary letter for a libel claim against the Conservative peer. In a letter seen by the Guardian, he accused her and her husband of having “abused the hard-won reputation and standing that I enjoyed in the media industry by instructing me repeatedly to disseminate lies”...
So still a long way to go, plus the verdicts in Trump's many court cases
The EU are meeting next week and want agreement on 50 billion. Orban blocked this last December and the majority of EU leaders are utterly sick of him . Talk now that the EU could use the nuclear option if he continues to arse lick Putin.
Can they suspend his voting rights?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_Senate_elections
When Biden does things which are against our interests, it's ok because he's not Trump, and when bad things happen on his watch, it's not his fault because he's not Trump.
If Trump goes full on backing Ukraine; good on him. I don't hold out much hope for that, though. And it won't make him a good person, or president. Just a good call.
(A good call Trump made was putting Bridenstine in charge of NASA. I can acknowledge that and still think he was a terrible president.)
I’d say the Senate is 3/1 a Republican gain.
A vote for Trump is a vote to enable Putin . Those of us who support Ukraine won’t take lectures from those who support Trump .
“For good reason.”
Let that sink in.
https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1750956182322254293
But trial is not until 2025 ! In Northampton iirc. Very Trumpish, except the MP for Ashfield does not have the power to pardon himself.
I asked this before :-).
And I don't see why all those officials he has abused - "Deranged" Jack Smith, Letitia "Peekaboo" James, and all the others - should not sue him for defamation, too.
Nikki Haley on Friday called Donald J. Trump “totally unhinged” after a failed attempt by one of his allies to push the Republican National Committee to declare him the party’s presumptive nominee, escalating her attacks on his mental acuity.
NY Times
If only it would make any difference whatsoever...
He's a clear and present danger to the republic as a functioning democracy.
Frankly if they are stupid enough to elect him they'll never get him out again.
Of course Harris would also read out the EC results before the new Senate is inaugrated even if the GOP gain it so it wouldn't affect the presidential election outcome either. If 50-50 she gets the casting vote in the new Senate too
However he is grossly overweight, under enormous stress from court cases, campaigning and losing family support. He's also showing signs of TIAs in his increasingly incoherent speeches. Say a 15% chance he will expire.
In addition he may become so obviously ill without dying, and/or be convicted or otherwise thwarted that I think his chances of standing are much less than 80%.
In addition it appears that the polls are overstating his support compared with actual (secret) ballots in Iowa and New Hampshire.
I think his chances of winning the Presidency are less than 30%. But that is still worryingly high.
Porridge with cranberries is food for the gods.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/26/opinions/ufos-actual-truth-bergen-german/index.html
As expected…
But your comment goes to show the sweeping assumptions that, if you think Trump is the better candidate, you must be pro-Russia, anti-vax etc. You are displaying your own prejudices (which TBF are shared by many on here).
10% are relieved
60% are watching Love Island
20% are wondering how they we going to afford their healthcare bills
"Advice of lawyers."
In order to make that stick he has to waive his right of client confidentiality to prove that the advice caused his problems.
Oooops.
Which to me suggests their loathing for Trump / desperation not to criticise Biden is a greater concern for them over the support of Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1750913440304996504
This was the interview:
https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/1750886251425616131
Goes well with a lot of stuff - and keeps pretty well a whole year if refrigerated.
https://x.com/gregabbott_tx/status/1750947818439598419
Biden’s decision to freeze LNG exports threatens Texas—and America.
This reckless decision is a gut punch to the hard-working men and women in the energy industry.
It also could cause some countries to rely upon dirty coal as opposed to cleaner burning natural gas.
But I'm not sure how much of Ukraine would be left.
Note this is about future development - and Biden included a national security caveat.
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/26/biden-delays-cp2-louisiana-lng-export-project
And we know that because it can't have been Starmer. He was no longer DPP by then.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/01/09/ukraine-war-win-chance-west-lost/
As the United States shut down its embassy in Kyiv ahead of the invasion, it did ship some weapons to great fanfare, such as Javelin antitank missiles. But the quantity was puny: only about 90 Javelins, according to Danilov. Then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, while also briefed about the hopelessness of the Ukrainian cause, had overruled internal objections and authorized a heftier load of about 2,000 NLAW missiles.
The only Westminster seat the Liberals/LDs have held at every general election since 1950
Why can anyone who truly supports Ukraine be willing to risk a Trump Presidency ?
2) How much of that is exportable to Europe (location)?
3) How much (if any) will be restricted from export to Europe by not building the Louisiana terminal?
4) When would it come on line - how many years from now?
So at some future point, the Louisiana terminal might or might not allow further growth in LNG exports to Europe. How much and when?
https://twitter.com/MattCartoonist/status/1750933858210451532
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/24/russia-ukraine-war-oral-history-00083757
Hmm. Interesting. My recipe uses port. Think I might try yours next year.
Only 330-odd days to go...
There are less than 50,000 US troops in Alaska, compared to 300,000 Polish troops in Poland and 10,000 US troops and other NATO troops there