Sorry to depart from my 'obsessions', but wouldn't this be pretty big if true? Still not convinced that it'll come to pass mind, 'will give consideration to' sounds awfully weaselly.
Yes.
I think this is indicative of Western pushback to Netanyahu ruling out a 2-state solution.
We should have recognised Palestine 30 years ago, after Oslo.
I'm sorry but independence for Oslo is just a step too far for me.
To say nothing of the danger of such an agreement. You can't move in Oslo without there being some grisly murder or series of grisly murders which ties up the police force for months on end.
I'm late to the party here so apologies if this point's already been made but the Deep State, doesn't really exist in the proactive sense being deployed here (though it can be a blocking blob *in* government). There is no deep conspiracy to keep Trump out and even if there were, it would be hard to enact and would almost certainly leak as it'd need too many people to act illegally. Just because Trump believes something exists, it doesn't mean it does.
It's possible that Trump could be banned from the ballot under the 14th Amendment. There is certainly an arguable case - though I don't expect it to carry; the temptation will always be to Let the People Have Their Say.
In terms of the betting, the real question is how likely is it that Trump is stopped by (1) legalities, (2) health, (3) GOP rivals, and for (4) the Democrat candidate. These can be considered independent events, although there is obviously overlap (we just have to compartmentalise the risks where those overlaps exist).
Personally, I think 45% is a pretty decent estimate of Trump's chances. I don't expect much to come of the court cases but there's a chance it will; health is always a risk with an obese, stressed late-septugenarian but the clock's ticking on that; Haley will not defeat him in the absence of (1) or (2) above, so risk (3) is effectively zero; and he has the edge on Biden, both in campaigning and the tilt of the Electoral College playing field - though Biden may make some of that back: incumbent presidents often do once they start hitting the stump themselves.
If Trump *does* fall, the value is not in laying him but in picking his replacement, which won't necessarily be Haley, depending on the circumstances. If he's 14th-out, he can probably still arrange to dominate the GOP convention and install a proxy.
Thanks.
What would the process be for picking his replacement?
Are they bound to candidates who have stood in the Republican race, or does it start again, or do the 'committee' get to chose in a similar way to late candidates being selected by Party HQ here?
The process is messy and depends on the time and nature when Trump falls. My understanding is this:
The key element is that - before and during the convention anyway - the convention is sovereign, which means the delegates are collectively sovereign but (initially at least) bound to the candidate they were elected for. That immediately causes a problem if many are Trump's delegates and Trump shouldn't have been on the ballot. More legal fun and games there as to who are legitimate delegates. There will be all sorts of provisions for replacement of delegates, which will vary by state.
But once assembled and credentialled, the delegates can pick who they want. Sort of. Party and state rules determine the extent to which they're bound to their candidate, and how and when they can be unbound. it'd take a lot of detailed legal analysis to come up with anything like a definitive answer (and even that probably isn't possible: there'll still be plenty of ambiguity and scope for disagreement). Might the convention *still* have to elect Trump, even if he's ruled ineligible (or is in prison, or hospital, or whatever), if he's got enough delegates and is refusing to release them? Who knows? Maybe. Eligibility to serve and eligibility to stand are not quite the same. Much will turn on circumstance.
But if Trump is out, either because he's dead or so utterly compromised that even he accepts he can't stand, then his elected delegates can then support who they want (Haley's delegates will still be bound, initially at least, if she's still in the race). They won't just be limited to people who ran in the primaries.
If Trump fell after the convention then it gets even worse; state laws on filing deadlines and early voting come into play and again, these will vary across the Union. To be honest, I wouldn't make any predictions on what would happen then. Chances are that procedures within the Republican Party would be invented on the fly and guided by GOP public opinion, at least as far as nominating an alternative, inasfar as that can be done.
If the vacancy occurs between the election and the Electoral College meeting, that's another different scenario, as is a vacancy between the votes being cast and counted*. The only certainty is that if it's after the Electoral College votes are counted, then the VP-elect will be inaugurated as president.
* I think in this case, Biden would become (remain) president, even if Trump had won, unless an Elector cast a vote for a different person - which would be interesting. Unless Congress broke with precedent and counted votes for a dead person as valid (which is possible), then the lack of an outright majority for any legitimate candidate in the Electoral College would send the vote to Congress (voting in states), who would have to choose between the top three in the ECVs, except if the votes were all Biden/Trump, there'd only be one candidate left.
What's the scenario of maximum, comedic chaos?
Biden dies the day before the election then Trump dies the day after. That would be sweet. 💯
At a certain point, it gets easy, because it just goes to the VP nom. Maximum chaos is probably between the Convention and filing deadlines.
Max chaos - Easy
Trump announces he is a Woke Democrat on a mission to destroy the Republican Party
I'm late to the party here so apologies if this point's already been made but the Deep State, doesn't really exist in the proactive sense being deployed here (though it can be a blocking blob *in* government). There is no deep conspiracy to keep Trump out and even if there were, it would be hard to enact and would almost certainly leak as it'd need too many people to act illegally. Just because Trump believes something exists, it doesn't mean it does.
It's possible that Trump could be banned from the ballot under the 14th Amendment. There is certainly an arguable case - though I don't expect it to carry; the temptation will always be to Let the People Have Their Say.
In terms of the betting, the real question is how likely is it that Trump is stopped by (1) legalities, (2) health, (3) GOP rivals, and for (4) the Democrat candidate. These can be considered independent events, although there is obviously overlap (we just have to compartmentalise the risks where those overlaps exist).
Personally, I think 45% is a pretty decent estimate of Trump's chances. I don't expect much to come of the court cases but there's a chance it will; health is always a risk with an obese, stressed late-septugenarian but the clock's ticking on that; Haley will not defeat him in the absence of (1) or (2) above, so risk (3) is effectively zero; and he has the edge on Biden, both in campaigning and the tilt of the Electoral College playing field - though Biden may make some of that back: incumbent presidents often do once they start hitting the stump themselves.
If Trump *does* fall, the value is not in laying him but in picking his replacement, which won't necessarily be Haley, depending on the circumstances. If he's 14th-out, he can probably still arrange to dominate the GOP convention and install a proxy.
Thanks.
What would the process be for picking his replacement?
Are they bound to candidates who have stood in the Republican race, or does it start again, or do the 'committee' get to chose in a similar way to late candidates being selected by Party HQ here?
The process is messy and depends on the time and nature when Trump falls. My understanding is this:
The key element is that - before and during the convention anyway - the convention is sovereign, which means the delegates are collectively sovereign but (initially at least) bound to the candidate they were elected for. That immediately causes a problem if many are Trump's delegates and Trump shouldn't have been on the ballot. More legal fun and games there as to who are legitimate delegates. There will be all sorts of provisions for replacement of delegates, which will vary by state.
But once assembled and credentialled, the delegates can pick who they want. Sort of. Party and state rules determine the extent to which they're bound to their candidate, and how and when they can be unbound. it'd take a lot of detailed legal analysis to come up with anything like a definitive answer (and even that probably isn't possible: there'll still be plenty of ambiguity and scope for disagreement). Might the convention *still* have to elect Trump, even if he's ruled ineligible (or is in prison, or hospital, or whatever), if he's got enough delegates and is refusing to release them? Who knows? Maybe. Eligibility to serve and eligibility to stand are not quite the same. Much will turn on circumstance.
But if Trump is out, either because he's dead or so utterly compromised that even he accepts he can't stand, then his elected delegates can then support who they want (Haley's delegates will still be bound, initially at least, if she's still in the race). They won't just be limited to people who ran in the primaries.
If Trump fell after the convention then it gets even worse; state laws on filing deadlines and early voting come into play and again, these will vary across the Union. To be honest, I wouldn't make any predictions on what would happen then. Chances are that procedures within the Republican Party would be invented on the fly and guided by GOP public opinion, at least as far as nominating an alternative, inasfar as that can be done.
If the vacancy occurs between the election and the Electoral College meeting, that's another different scenario, as is a vacancy between the votes being cast and counted*. The only certainty is that if it's after the Electoral College votes are counted, then the VP-elect will be inaugurated as president.
* I think in this case, Biden would become (remain) president, even if Trump had won, unless an Elector cast a vote for a different person - which would be interesting. Unless Congress broke with precedent and counted votes for a dead person as valid (which is possible), then the lack of an outright majority for any legitimate candidate in the Electoral College would send the vote to Congress (voting in states), who would have to choose between the top three in the ECVs, except if the votes were all Biden/Trump, there'd only be one candidate left.
Imagine a world without any lawyers lol.
Since the Election is on Nov 5, perhaps the most elegant solution is to send the real Trump to Lewes.
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
Where are those 10 million extra people going to live?
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
From the actual source. The ONS
“Over the 15 years between mid-2021 and mid-2036, the UK population is projected to grow by 6.6 million people.
This includes 541,000 more births than deaths and international net migration of 6.1 million people.”
Utter insanity. Any party that promises to stop this, and does it, will win big. That’s not the Tories, they cannot be trusted
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
More than 60% of the national debt has been run up since 2007.
Dramatic changes there. Ipsos's previous polls had Labour on 46 (Nov) and 41 (Jan) so they do jump about more than most. The LD levels were 12 and 13, so the near-halving to 7 looks like an outlier. The underlying theme of 20+ leads for Labour seem to be a consensus for the polls that don't assume swingback.
It'd be interesting to see a header discussing why the LibDems are doing quite so badly, given the general mood away from the Tories - you'd expect all Opposition parties to be flourishing, but their score is mostly 9-10%, 1-2 points below 2019. They are relying very heavily on targeted "only we can win here" campaigning to deliver the seats, but as we saw in mid-Beds that can go wrong if someone else is trying hard as well, and although the other parties will often target other seats, in a General Election the local effort can get drowned out. My view FWIW is that people now mostly see LD and Lab as interchangeable (I don't say that as necessarily a good thing), and Labour is picking up the Tory defectors merely by virtue of being more prominwent in the news.
Instinctive reaction is it's an outlier.
However, I do wonder whether the Lib Dems are being hurt by the whole Post Office - Ed Davey association.
No explanation for Reform though.
Why has Davey suffered and not Starmer? The client media made a compelling if spurious case against Starmer as DPP.
The case against Davey was almost as spurious.
I don't believe the general voting public has much idea who he is. A lot would probably assume he's a tory.
Happy to file this one in the circular cabinet.
The client media have been quite adept at unhitching the Tories from anything negative that occured between 2010 and 2015 and hanging blame on the LDs.
I doubt Davey having been vilified by the Daily Telegraph has lost a single vote. The Ipsos poll seems very confused and volatile.
Er have they? Perhaps in your head. You keep pushing this line, over and again, to the point of extreme tediousness.
Polling evidence rather suggests otherwise. But you crack on.
OK you client media defending Tory shill, just look at how the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph handled the aftermath of Mr Bates v the Post Office. The criticism of Government inaction over Horizon between 2010 and 2019 focused on Davey (with a nod to the supervisory role of Cable) and Swinson. Not a finger pointed at Dave who was after all Prime Minister between 2010 to 2016 or any Post Office oversight Minister since 2015.
I think the point being made is that the client media may have tried to unhitch the Tories from anything negative 2010-5 and blame the LDs instead. But they haven't succeeded in persuading the public of that.
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
Where are those 10 million extra people going to live?
Reform UK have proposed a ‘one in, one out’ immigration policy. Would you prefer that?
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
Need the young ones to get off their butts and work like the boomers did instead of whining and being woke lazy gits.
I'm late to the party here so apologies if this point's already been made but the Deep State, doesn't really exist in the proactive sense being deployed here (though it can be a blocking blob *in* government). There is no deep conspiracy to keep Trump out and even if there were, it would be hard to enact and would almost certainly leak as it'd need too many people to act illegally. Just because Trump believes something exists, it doesn't mean it does.
It's possible that Trump could be banned from the ballot under the 14th Amendment. There is certainly an arguable case - though I don't expect it to carry; the temptation will always be to Let the People Have Their Say.
In terms of the betting, the real question is how likely is it that Trump is stopped by (1) legalities, (2) health, (3) GOP rivals, and for (4) the Democrat candidate. These can be considered independent events, although there is obviously overlap (we just have to compartmentalise the risks where those overlaps exist).
Personally, I think 45% is a pretty decent estimate of Trump's chances. I don't expect much to come of the court cases but there's a chance it will; health is always a risk with an obese, stressed late-septugenarian but the clock's ticking on that; Haley will not defeat him in the absence of (1) or (2) above, so risk (3) is effectively zero; and he has the edge on Biden, both in campaigning and the tilt of the Electoral College playing field - though Biden may make some of that back: incumbent presidents often do once they start hitting the stump themselves.
If Trump *does* fall, the value is not in laying him but in picking his replacement, which won't necessarily be Haley, depending on the circumstances. If he's 14th-out, he can probably still arrange to dominate the GOP convention and install a proxy.
Thanks.
What would the process be for picking his replacement?
Are they bound to candidates who have stood in the Republican race, or does it start again, or do the 'committee' get to chose in a similar way to late candidates being selected by Party HQ here?
The process is messy and depends on the time and nature when Trump falls. My understanding is this:
The key element is that - before and during the convention anyway - the convention is sovereign, which means the delegates are collectively sovereign but (initially at least) bound to the candidate they were elected for. That immediately causes a problem if many are Trump's delegates and Trump shouldn't have been on the ballot. More legal fun and games there as to who are legitimate delegates. There will be all sorts of provisions for replacement of delegates, which will vary by state.
But once assembled and credentialled, the delegates can pick who they want. Sort of. Party and state rules determine the extent to which they're bound to their candidate, and how and when they can be unbound. it'd take a lot of detailed legal analysis to come up with anything like a definitive answer (and even that probably isn't possible: there'll still be plenty of ambiguity and scope for disagreement). Might the convention *still* have to elect Trump, even if he's ruled ineligible (or is in prison, or hospital, or whatever), if he's got enough delegates and is refusing to release them? Who knows? Maybe. Eligibility to serve and eligibility to stand are not quite the same. Much will turn on circumstance.
But if Trump is out, either because he's dead or so utterly compromised that even he accepts he can't stand, then his elected delegates can then support who they want (Haley's delegates will still be bound, initially at least, if she's still in the race). They won't just be limited to people who ran in the primaries.
If Trump fell after the convention then it gets even worse; state laws on filing deadlines and early voting come into play and again, these will vary across the Union. To be honest, I wouldn't make any predictions on what would happen then. Chances are that procedures within the Republican Party would be invented on the fly and guided by GOP public opinion, at least as far as nominating an alternative, inasfar as that can be done.
If the vacancy occurs between the election and the Electoral College meeting, that's another different scenario, as is a vacancy between the votes being cast and counted*. The only certainty is that if it's after the Electoral College votes are counted, then the VP-elect will be inaugurated as president.
* I think in this case, Biden would become (remain) president, even if Trump had won, unless an Elector cast a vote for a different person - which would be interesting. Unless Congress broke with precedent and counted votes for a dead person as valid (which is possible), then the lack of an outright majority for any legitimate candidate in the Electoral College would send the vote to Congress (voting in states), who would have to choose between the top three in the ECVs, except if the votes were all Biden/Trump, there'd only be one candidate left.
What's the scenario of maximum, comedic chaos?
Biden dies the day before the election then Trump dies the day after. That would be sweet. 💯
At a certain point, it gets easy, because it just goes to the VP nom. Maximum chaos is probably between the Convention and filing deadlines.
Max chaos - Easy
Trump announces he is a Woke Democrat on a mission to destroy the Republican Party
Then starts the Coup.
Given his current state of confusion/delusion, that's not entirely unlikely.
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
From the actual source. The ONS
“Over the 15 years between mid-2021 and mid-2036, the UK population is projected to grow by 6.6 million people.
This includes 541,000 more births than deaths and international net migration of 6.1 million people.”
Utter insanity. Any party that promises to stop this, and does it, will win big. That’s not the Tories, they cannot be trusted
We may have to start our own party
I've never got the argument that "students" should drop out of the migration figures because they are only here for a temporary course: firstly, if they were, they'd be netted out of the migration figures anyway and, secondly, it's quite clear that the majority stay so they need to be.
Why do you hang on to that utter (k)nob's every last word?
Is he wrong?
We need another 10 million people to pay off the debt run up by boomers. But first we need to convince millennials and gen-xers that it will be a thoroughly good thing. It's going quite well, I'd say.
More than 60% of the national debt has been run up since 2007.
When the oldest boomers reached the age of 61. Huh.
Comments
Trump announces he is a Woke Democrat on a mission to destroy the Republican Party
Then starts the Coup.
Since the Election is on Nov 5, perhaps the most elegant solution is to send the real Trump to Lewes.
“Over the 15 years between mid-2021 and mid-2036, the UK population is projected to grow by 6.6 million people.
This includes 541,000 more births than deaths and international net migration of 6.1 million people.”
Utter insanity. Any party that promises to stop this, and does it, will win big. That’s not the Tories, they cannot be trusted
We may have to start our own party
NEW THREAD