FPT, Nevada, I think the Republicans are knocking it out of the park. That’s the obvious inference from early voting.
But, it does not mean that they will do so in every State.
Well, you could infer that a lot of the early voting registered Republicans in Nevada are in fact Harris voting ones, but that seems a bit optimistic to rely upon.
Not really, it actually hits the nail on the head. Nobody, not the Rackety Ralston or anybody, knows who these votes are for, only who they are registered.
Imo the number of Registered GOP voting Harris in this election will be massive. Are the Cheney and Bush not registered republicans?
We should all be on the same page, that nationwide Trump has found many new supporters, amongst the young of all colours. This is a known known. And we half suspect, these not drawn to him personally, not won through love of MAGA and of Trump, but, in a house divided - reference Janet Ganesh FT on more than 20 years of elections shows a constant divided nation on politics and issues - twentysomething thirtysomething voters will be drawn to one of two platforms, guns or control, woman’s rights or abortion restrictions etc, whilst leaders of platforms come and go, like Trump now representing just half of the divide, is just immaterial, ephemeral to these platform voters.
But, new voters in the wrong part of the bigger picture this time can dilute his EC precision and efficiency, there in previous elections. Trump closer in the PV can still equate to a comprehensive EC drubbing, Harris gaining the votes of Cheney and Bush tribes, can I believe improve Dem vote efficiency and precision.
Whatever the result, Trump holding college educated and independent voters in the swing states, those who vote more on details, than broad brush like cost of living, holding them this time to the level he enjoyed in 2016 and 2020, and to cancel out the registered Republican losses that will happen, would be a surprise to me. To me, some voters have clearly sussed him, and the whole pointlessness of ongoing disruption and knocking down, ripping up, without the necessary reward and benefits of subsequently putting back together with something better.
Trump and MAGA was always time limited, before it was seriously asked: do we end up building back better after all this disruption? Win all lose - I still call it for Trump - the loss of the Cheney and Bush tribes from the Big Teepee are clear signals, in smoke on a light blue horizon, of the decline of Trumpism and MAGA. This election perhaps even its final fall.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
In other words, in 2021, Nevada introduced auto-registration for those who aren't when you sign up for a driver's licence etc and it doesn't do so with a party. For that reason there's a lot more people who register as independents than before the law came in.
That may make it difficult to extrapolate on previous EV figures as this is the first Presidential election with that law in place.
Frankly I think people writing off SKS at this point are incredibly naïve. You could have taken these posts and transplanted them back to 2020/2021 when people were saying Johnson would be PM for a decade. I think only @Anabobazina and myself were saying otherwise.
Of course I also thought Jezza would win in 2019 so...
Starmer is there for the next 4 years plus unless he has a health issue or something entirely unexpected
Maybe not. Autumn 2027 looking most likely Starmer exit date imo.
The election won’t be 15th August 2029 as that’s holiday season for sure. Also if 5 party +2 Nats +1 Corbyn Hamas Alliance is still polling strongly in 2028, rather than historic largely 2 party general elections, Labour couldn’t possibly guess what would happen in a year early GE, like Blair could in 2005 with modest poll lead to defend, so it’s for sure going to be a 2029 election.
I’m 100% confident the date of the General Election is 3rd May 2029. If you want a flutter on the date.
If in 2027 Starmer is 15%+ behind the Conservatives, he will be removed, late 2027, if conference doesn’t get a poll bounce, in order to give his successor (Reeves) a year and bit in role before the 2029 election.
Labour has neither a tradition nor a mechanism for ejecting a party leader nor a PM.
that is true to a point but starmer is no Corbyn or Johnson. He'll know when the writing is on the wall and will leave for the benefit of the party. I'd expect it to be age or health that made him stand down though
To spend time helping his wife in her new clothes shop.
Maybe even retreat to an uplands farm and set up a Donkey Sanctuary.
I have resigned myself to a Trump victory. America is utterly doomed.
You don't know that. If the past fifteen years have taught us anything it's that poll ties can break either way. Most options are still on the table.
Look, some piece of advice. If you can't focus on the large picture, focus on the small. Old mathematical trick: simplify the problem to one which you can cope with, then work on that ("assume the can opener" as the old joke has it). For me it's Nevada, with good odds either side, lots of info, and the only decider is my skill and judgement. You may pick others, and Robert believes that Georgia may flip for example. If our business is finding value and the large seam defeats us, let us find a smaller one that fits our pickaxe. Don't get tied up over problems you can't solve: we can't fix the world but we can fix the small bits with our small hands.
Re: Leon’s post. I did see it at the time but didn’t respond, assuming it was a parody. Maybe I was wrong to make that assumption.
I'm slightly surprised it's generating any controversy. It didn't strike me as in any way controversial.
The view expressed that has caused this controversy is perhaps a minority view - but what I expect will happen is that it will eventually gain the status of a protected characteristic under the Equalities Act. So it won't be possible to ban or censor it. I sometimes wonder if this is actually the best way to deal with the 'far right'; designate them as a legally protected minority, their beliefs are recognised but they are subject to the same limits of action as everyone else.
Just listening to Trump compared to 2020, then 2016, then before, it's remarkable how much he has declined.
Yes, people who think he's no different have not paid attention. And he's older than Biden was last time I think.
Most of them are well aware of his decline, but they don't care because they think America will be Made Great Again by running it like Russia.
I've no doubt many are aware but don't care, and his media fluffers who go on about how energetic and brilliant he is have to know he is not as energetic as he was, but some people genuinely seem to believe the fluffling praise.
It wasn't credible if people said Biden hadn't slowed down since 2020, and it isn't credible for Trump. How many actually beleive it? IDK, maybe half his supporters?
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
Re: Leon’s post. I did see it at the time but didn’t respond, assuming it was a parody. Maybe I was wrong to make that assumption.
Sometimes parodies overshoot the line, even when the intent of a parody is to push against it, hence why sin bins exist as halfway measures.
If we do decide to release Leon we may ban him from talking about things like race, religion, immigration, IQ, travel, food, and AI.
As the father of mixed race children his comments seriously upset me, I nearly called him the c word but he doesn't have the depth or the warmth.
Even his nominally political posts are coloured by his views on race, religion, etc., although that applies to most of us. If he had his own travel blog, I would probably read it, but I get annoyed when he constantly hijacks threads, and I suspect I’m not alone.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
The SC are partisan, it's the nature of how they are all appointed, though not all partisan to the same degree, but they are all generally smarter than the average partisan, as you'd hope given their positions and experiences, so they don't bring it out for everything, and they will rule unanimously or occasionally surprise on some issues. If the GOP justices were planning to lean on the scales to help Trump (and they didn't respond to his pleas last time, though this time the legislatures are likely to help out more), they wouldn't do it for an RFK ballot issue, I'm sure.
Nor should they do everything Trump might want, just from a practical perspective - a President is for 4-8 years, they are there for decades, as politicians themselves they have a lot of power and their own political objectives to achieve on the court over the long game.
(That they should not be politicians is true but so improbable it's not worth delving into).
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
If the quote above is the one that has caused the angst it’s not racist though.
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
Ditto Harrison Ford. Imagine his alternate career always playing the villain…
Also Close Encounters. Verging on forgotten now, but massive in the 70s.
Spielberg filmed the scene, but it was cut, of Dreyfus character waking up, and her bare boob looked just like knoll. Was she cast on knoll lookalike boobs on her resume? 🤔
Or am I just making all this up, like a dream sequence?
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
They pretend to have an originalist view, but will drop it for the big, pro-Republican decisions. The ruling making the President massively immune owes nothing to originalism.
If the Trump administration does implement 10% across the board tariffs, then there's going to be a lot of that pain: in the US, in Europe and in Asia.
But here's the thing. It's a hell of a lot easier to let an excessive savings rate (Germany's problem) normalize, than the other way around.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
I don't buy the argument either side has entirely consistent ways of interpreting the constitution on the court (sure, a general approach), I just assume that whilst they are all politicians in robes, that doesn't mean they think there is a plausible way to legally argue for every single thing they want, and their political goals, whilst partisan, will not match up entirely with the concerns of fellow politicians who have to fight for office every 2,4, or 6 years. They don't need or want to act in the attention seeking performative fights that, say, Congressmen do.
They have a different perspective, can afford to be more subtle most of the time, and for most everyday cases (such as exist in relative terms) which come before the court they can see there is either no major issue to make into a political fight so deal with on its own terms, so their political goals are not going to influence it significantly, or they are smart enough to know when potential gain is not worth the cost of pushing against something settled. The 2020 cases are a good example - there's probably a few on the court who would like to have helped in some way, but there was nothing, despite Trump's efforts, they could have really hung it on even had they wanted, and no way coudl they get a majority to do so.
If the Trump administration does implement 10% across the board tariffs, then there's going to be a lot of that pain: in the US, in Europe and in Asia.
But here's the thing. It's a hell of a lot easier to let an excessive savings rate (Germany's problem) normalize, than the other way around.
I guess I missed the step in Donny's cunning plan where slapping a 10% tariff on BMW means selling more Chevys in Munich...
Frankly I think people writing off SKS at this point are incredibly naïve. You could have taken these posts and transplanted them back to 2020/2021 when people were saying Johnson would be PM for a decade. I think only @Anabobazina and myself were saying otherwise.
Of course I also thought Jezza would win in 2019 so...
Starmer is there for the next 4 years plus unless he has a health issue or something entirely unexpected
Maybe not. Autumn 2027 looking most likely Starmer exit date imo.
The election won’t be 15th August 2029 as that’s holiday season for sure. Also if 5 party +2 Nats +1 Corbyn Hamas Alliance is still polling strongly in 2028, rather than historic largely 2 party general elections, Labour couldn’t possibly guess what would happen in a year early GE, like Blair could in 2005 with modest poll lead to defend, so it’s for sure going to be a 2029 election.
I’m 100% confident the date of the General Election is 3rd May 2029. If you want a flutter on the date.
If in 2027 Starmer is 15%+ behind the Conservatives, he will be removed, late 2027, if conference doesn’t get a poll bounce, in order to give his successor (Reeves) a year and bit in role before the 2029 election.
Labour has neither a tradition nor a mechanism for ejecting a party leader nor a PM.
that is true to a point but starmer is no Corbyn or Johnson. He'll know when the writing is on the wall and will leave for the benefit of the party. I'd expect it to be age or health that made him stand down though
To spend time helping his wife in her new clothes shop.
Maybe even retreat to an uplands farm and set up a Donkey Sanctuary.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
If the quote above is the one that has caused the angst it’s not racist though.
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
Talking about zero migration is nativist. Talking about white babies isn't unless you think that no non whites can ever be classed as natives
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
I don't buy the argument either side has entirely consistent ways of interpreting the constitution on the court, I just assume that whilst they are all politicians in robes, that doesn't mean they think there is a plausible way to legally argue for every single thing they want, and their political goals, whilst partisan, will not match up entirely with the concerns of fellow politicians who have to fight for office every 2,4, or 6 years. They don't need ot want to act in the attention seeking performative fights that, say, Congressmen do.
They have a different perspective, can afford to be more subtle most of the time, and for most everyday cases (such as exist in relative terms) which come before the court they can see there is either no major issue to make into a political fight so deal with on its own terms, so their political goals are not going to influence it significantly, or they are smart enough to know when potential gain is not worth the cost of pushing against something settled.
I like Supreme Court justices who have opinions that are not universally in favour of one political group or another. It's why I am significantly fonder of Goresuch and Roberts than Alito and Thomas. I've also been impressed by Ketanji Brown Jackson for the same reason: she's not been afraid to break with her liberal colleagues if it doesn't match her jurisprudence.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
If the quote above is the one that has caused the angst it’s not racist though.
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
He specified white babies. That’s racism, not nativism.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
They pretend to have an originalist view, but will drop it for the big, pro-Republican decisions. The ruling making the President massively immune owes nothing to originalism.
Oh, I'm sure the Founders were all about people having untrammelled power and relying on their good will to not abuse it.
(Yes, I'm sure the reasoning was more complicated than that).
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
If the quote above is the one that has caused the angst it’s not racist though.
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
Talking about zero migration is nativist. Talking about white babies isn't unless you think that no non whites can ever be classed as natives
True, although I doubt he was thinking that through
FPT, Nevada, I think the Republicans are knocking it out of the park. That’s the obvious inference from early voting.
But, it does not mean that they will do so in every State.
Well, you could infer that a lot of the early voting registered Republicans in Nevada are in fact Harris voting ones, but that seems a bit optimistic to rely upon.
Not really, it actually hits the nail on the head. Nobody, not the Rackety Ralston or anybody, knows who these votes are for, only who they are registered.
Imo the number of Registered GOP voting Harris in this election will be massive. Are the Cheney and Bush not registered republicans?
We should all be on the same page, that nationwide Trump has found many new supporters, amongst the young of all colours. This is a known known. And we half suspect, these not drawn to him personally, not won through love of MAGA and of Trump, but, in a house divided - reference Janet Ganesh FT on more than 20 years of elections shows a constant divided nation on politics and issues - twentysomething thirtysomething voters will be drawn to one of two platforms, guns or control, woman’s rights or abortion restrictions etc, whilst leaders of platforms come and go, like Trump now representing just half of the divide, is just immaterial, ephemeral to these platform voters.
But, new voters in the wrong part of the bigger picture this time can dilute his EC precision and efficiency, there in previous elections. Trump closer in the PV can still equate to a comprehensive EC drubbing, Harris gaining the votes of Cheney and Bush tribes, can I believe improve Dem vote efficiency and precision.
Whatever the result, Trump holding college educated and independent voters in the swing states, those who vote more on details, than broad brush like cost of living, holding them this time to the level he enjoyed in 2016 and 2020, and to cancel out the registered Republican losses that will happen, would be a surprise to me. To me, some voters have clearly sussed him, and the whole pointlessness of ongoing disruption and knocking down, ripping up, without the necessary reward and benefits of subsequently putting back together with something better.
Trump and MAGA was always time limited, before it was seriously asked: do we end up building back better after all this disruption? Win all lose - I still call it for Trump - the loss of the Cheney and Bush tribes from the Big Teepee are clear signals, in smoke on a light blue horizon, of the decline of Trumpism and MAGA. This election perhaps even its final fall.
If Trump loses, he is a spent political force. The extent to which Vance can carry the MAGA torch forward is questionable.
The prize of a Harris victory is a Republican Party trying to refind its base - and probably failing for at least one Presidential and a series of House and Senate elections. Harris could potentially have a huge majority in the House and potentially a two-thirds majority across Congress. That would allow checks to be put in place on corrupt Supreme Court justices with a series of specified standards to which they must adhere - and possibly term limits. It allows Rowe v Wade to be reinstated. It could spell the end of gerrymandering and voter suppression, all of which the right would be powerless to prevent - cuz Donald Trump.
If Trump loses, he is a spent political force. The extent to which Vance can carry the MAGA torch forward is questionable.
The prize of a Harris victory is a Republican Party trying to refind its base - and probably failing for at least one Presidential and a series of House and Senate elections. Harris could potentially have a huge majority in the House and potentially a two-thirds majority across Congress. That would allow checks to be put in place on corrupt Supreme Court justices with a series of specified standards to which they must adhere - and possibly term limits. It allows Rowe v Wade to be reinstated. It could spell the end of gerrymandering and voter suppression, all of which the right would be powerless to prevent - cuz Donald Trump.
This seems like one of those stories that will get little attention, pass everybody by, but probably will end up having a big impact on policy.
Isn’t this just Labour wanted to review this policy anywhere, so Packham’s case is effectively moot? He’s not, as far as I can see, won anything that the government didn’t want to do.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
If the quote above is the one that has caused the angst it’s not racist though.
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
Talking about zero migration is nativist. Talking about white babies isn't unless you think that no non whites can ever be classed as natives
True, although I doubt he was thinking that through
No I don't suppose he was either. I find Leon impossible to dislike as he's like a puppy destroying a chew toy when he gets hold of an idea or concept that enthuses him. It doesn't mean that he doesn't go too far and needs to be put on the newspapers in the corner sometimes though.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
If the quote above is the one that has caused the angst it’s not racist though.
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
He specified white babies. That’s racism, not nativism.
There is also the question of manners and decency.
I could run an argument that preferring the racial mix of one’s country not to change is not NECESSARILY racist because you are not necessarily saying one race is objectively better.
But I am not going to, because in the context of the thread he knew he was effectively talking about posters, their children, and their grandchildren. And that’s, at best, rude and nasty.
This seems like one of those stories that will get little attention, pass everybody by, but probably will end up having a big impact on policy.
Isn’t this just Labour wanted to review this policy anywhere, so Packham’s case is effectively moot? He’s not, as far as I can see, won anything that the government didn’t want to do.
Yes and no. If they wanted to or not, the lawyers have now done a deal with Packham which they will have to follow when setting policy going forward. It won't be easy for a different government to change course.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
They pretend to have an originalist view, but will drop it for the big, pro-Republican decisions. The ruling making the President massively immune owes nothing to originalism.
Oh, I'm sure the Founders were all about people having untrammelled power and relying on their good will to not abuse it.
(Yes, I'm sure the reasoning was more complicated than that).
The counter argument would be that the Founding Fathers didn't mention anything about it in the constitution because they assumed that all statesmen were gentlemen of good will. The fact that this isn't the case now is immaterial.
Great set of articles. I do always enjoy the origin of the phrase Gerrymandering. When I first referred to the practice to my partner she thought I was talking about a politician called “Gerry Mandarin” - she kept saying “but who’s Gerry Mandarin? And what has he got to do with it?”
Also enjoyed this tidbit about the contest in Alaska:
Alaska already has this system in place and one of the “Democrat” candidates in the general election for Alaska’s sole House seat, Eric Hafner is in prison in New York and has reportedly never even been to Alaska
Reminded me of a Discworld novel where all politicians were put into gaol as soon as they were elected. Because it saved time.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
They pretend to have an originalist view, but will drop it for the big, pro-Republican decisions. The ruling making the President massively immune owes nothing to originalism.
Oh, I'm sure the Founders were all about people having untrammelled power and relying on their good will to not abuse it.
(Yes, I'm sure the reasoning was more complicated than that).
The counter argument would be that the Founding Fathers didn't mention anything about it in the constitution because they assumed that all statesmen were gentlemen of good will. The fact that this isn't the case now is immaterial.
They were pretty clear about not liking kings and their untrammelled powers, weren’t they?
It’s amazing how little media attention Musks hardship comments got . Gutting spending on services to essentially keep giving tax cuts that favour the rich.
It’s amazing how little media attention Musks hardship comments got . Gutting spending on services to essentially keep giving tax cuts that favour the rich.
The reason it's known as trickle down is because they are pissing on us.
Just listening to Trump compared to 2020, then 2016, then before, it's remarkable how much he has declined.
Its a big decline but it isn't remarkable considering the ageing and stress he has undergone.
I doubt you were quite so considerate when Joe had his senior moments.
I'm not sure why you and CHB are so touchy about what I said.
Biden wasn't fit for the job and Trump isn't fit for the job.
Both have declined in the last four years and for the same reasons of ageing and stress.
The decline caused by ageing is inevitable given their ages, the decline caused by stress is also inevitable given what they've been doing during the past four years.
The only questions there might be are:
1) Who is most unfit mentally to be President 2) Who has declined the most 3) Whether it was ageing or stress that caused most of the decline
It’s amazing how little media attention Musks hardship comments got . Gutting spending on services to essentially keep giving tax cuts that favour the rich.
If the Trump administration does implement 10% across the board tariffs, then there's going to be a lot of that pain: in the US, in Europe and in Asia.
But here's the thing. It's a hell of a lot easier to let an excessive savings rate (Germany's problem) normalize, than the other way around.
Yes but you'd have to teach the German government some basic macro first. Ever since they rejected Keynes in the 50s, they just haven't wanted to hear.
Their macroeconomic illiteracy has been obvious for decades - see the way they handled the German reunification, the euro, the EU's stability pact, and now the masochistic Schwarze Null.
It's only Germany's superb supply side and in particular cheap Russian gas that has enabled Germany to do relatively well in a sclerotic continent. Where Germany's future growth is going to come from is not obvious.
It’s amazing how little media attention Musks hardship comments got . Gutting spending on services to essentially keep giving tax cuts that favour the rich.
Perhaps more dangerous for Trump is Musk suggesting that stock markets would fall.
This seems like one of those stories that will get little attention, pass everybody by, but probably will end up having a big impact on policy.
Isn’t this just Labour wanted to review this policy anywhere, so Packham’s case is effectively moot? He’s not, as far as I can see, won anything that the government didn’t want to do.
Yes and no. If they wanted to or not, the lawyers have now done a deal with Packham which they will have to follow when setting policy going forward. It won't be easy for a different government to change course.
Parliament is sovereign; they can just change the law.
If the Conservatives had been serious about reversing climate legislation they would have done so. In the end, it was just virtue signalling ahead of the election.
A reminder that the Supreme Court doesn't just automatically do what would favour Trump.
"Supreme Court rejects RFK Jr. plea to be removed from ballot in two swing states"
"Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is now allied with Republican nominee Donald Trump and has sought to take his name from the ballot in some states."
People often get the politics of the Supreme Court wrong. When you talk about a conservative justice it means they have an originalist view of the constitution. That often maps on to the electoral politics of conservatives but not always. It's striking that hardly any Trump appointed justices had any truck with his 2020 electoral fraud lawsuits.
They pretend to have an originalist view, but will drop it for the big, pro-Republican decisions. The ruling making the President massively immune owes nothing to originalism.
Oh, I'm sure the Founders were all about people having untrammelled power and relying on their good will to not abuse it.
(Yes, I'm sure the reasoning was more complicated than that).
The counter argument would be that the Founding Fathers didn't mention anything about it in the constitution because they assumed that all statesmen were gentlemen of good will. The fact that this isn't the case now is immaterial.
They were pretty clear about not liking kings and their untrammelled powers, weren’t they?
It might have made for good propaganda but the Founding Fathers will have been well aware that George III was not an absolute autocrat in England, never mind America.
That their independence was won with substantial help from Louis XVI is very much the ironic icing on that particular cake.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
The casually racist post I referred to earlier this evening wasn’t one of his polemics (which I’m sort of inured to), it was someone else. I can’t be sure whether it was the poster’s own view or they were illustrating the views of others (albeit sympathetically). But it did shock me that such comments seem to pass without the shock they might have generated a few years ago.
It’s amazing how little media attention Musks hardship comments got . Gutting spending on services to essentially keep giving tax cuts that favour the rich.
Perhaps more dangerous for Trump is Musk suggesting that stock markets would fall.
It would be like a Tory donor suggesting house prices might fall here.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
The casually racist post I referred to earlier this evening wasn’t one of his polemics (which I’m sort of inured to), it was someone else. I can’t be sure whether it was the poster’s own view or they were illustrating the views of others (albeit sympathetically). But it did shock me that such comments seem to pass without the shock they might have generated a few years ago.
They posted on here earlier today saying it was a joke, intended as a parody.
Re: Leon’s post. I did see it at the time but didn’t respond, assuming it was a parody. Maybe I was wrong to make that assumption.
Sometimes parodies overshoot the line, even when the intent of a parody is to push against it, hence why sin bins exist as halfway measures.
If we do decide to release Leon we may ban him from talking about things like race, religion, immigration, IQ, travel, food, and AI.
As the father of mixed race children his comments seriously upset me, I nearly called him the c word but he doesn't have the depth or the warmth.
Even his nominally political posts are coloured by his views on race, religion, etc., although that applies to most of us. If he had his own travel blog, I would probably read it, but I get annoyed when he constantly hijacks threads, and I suspect I’m not alone.
If you like racist bile or Japanese toilets he's your man. Travelogues are ten a penny. Some are even interesting.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
The casually racist post I referred to earlier this evening wasn’t one of his polemics (which I’m sort of inured to), it was someone else. I can’t be sure whether it was the poster’s own view or they were illustrating the views of others (albeit sympathetically). But it did shock me that such comments seem to pass without the shock they might have generated a few years ago.
They posted on here earlier today saying it was a joke, intended as a parody.
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action. I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
Bring back the Open University on broadcast TV.
Veritasium have a brilliant way of setting things up with really interesting back story and context about actually useful it was used in well known moments in history. That is so often missing from here is a theory, learn it.
The share of high-earning employees in the labour market has fallen to the lowest level since at least 1997, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). High-earners now account for just 22.7pc of the UK workforce, a decline from a high of 26.4pc last reached in 2012.
One question I would like to know, as well as large numbers of people coming to the UK, we have had over the past few years a large number of people leaving. Be interesting to know how many were high earners.
FPT, Nevada, I think the Republicans are knocking it out of the park. That’s the obvious inference from early voting.
But, it does not mean that they will do so in every State.
Well, you could infer that a lot of the early voting registered Republicans in Nevada are in fact Harris voting ones, but that seems a bit optimistic to rely upon.
Not really, it actually hits the nail on the head. Nobody, not the Rackety Ralston or anybody, knows who these votes are for, only who they are registered.
Imo the number of Registered GOP voting Harris in this election will be massive. Are the Cheney and Bush not registered republicans?
We should all be on the same page, that nationwide Trump has found many new supporters, amongst the young of all colours. This is a known known. And we half suspect, these not drawn to him personally, not won through love of MAGA and of Trump, but, in a house divided - reference Janet Ganesh FT on more than 20 years of elections shows a constant divided nation on politics and issues - twentysomething thirtysomething voters will be drawn to one of two platforms, guns or control, woman’s rights or abortion restrictions etc, whilst leaders of platforms come and go, like Trump now representing just half of the divide, is just immaterial, ephemeral to these platform voters.
But, new voters in the wrong part of the bigger picture this time can dilute his EC precision and efficiency, there in previous elections. Trump closer in the PV can still equate to a comprehensive EC drubbing, Harris gaining the votes of Cheney and Bush tribes, can I believe improve Dem vote efficiency and precision.
Whatever the result, Trump holding college educated and independent voters in the swing states, those who vote more on details, than broad brush like cost of living, holding them this time to the level he enjoyed in 2016 and 2020, and to cancel out the registered Republican losses that will happen, would be a surprise to me. To me, some voters have clearly sussed him, and the whole pointlessness of ongoing disruption and knocking down, ripping up, without the necessary reward and benefits of subsequently putting back together with something better.
Trump and MAGA was always time limited, before it was seriously asked: do we end up building back better after all this disruption? Win all lose - I still call it for Trump - the loss of the Cheney and Bush tribes from the Big Teepee are clear signals, in smoke on a light blue horizon, of the decline of Trumpism and MAGA. This election perhaps even its final fall.
If Trump loses, he is a spent political force. The extent to which Vance can carry the MAGA torch forward is questionable.
The prize of a Harris victory is a Republican Party trying to refind its base - and probably failing for at least one Presidential and a series of House and Senate elections. Harris could potentially have a huge majority in the House and potentially a two-thirds majority across Congress. That would allow checks to be put in place on corrupt Supreme Court justices with a series of specified standards to which they must adhere - and possibly term limits. It allows Rowe v Wade to be reinstated. It could spell the end of gerrymandering and voter suppression, all of which the right would be powerless to prevent - cuz Donald Trump.
A two-thirds Democrat majority in the Senate would require winning both Senators in every State up to Kansas, and one in Missouri, where the Cook Partisan Voter Index is R+10. This would mean winning both Senators in Florida, North Carolina, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Alaska and South Carolina. And even then, you'd have to convince all these Democratic Senators who are representing quite red states, to put their seats in peril by passing contentious reforms.
Another factor that would make it difficult to achieve is that the somewhat more fragmented and individual nature of party politics in the US, means that you'd have a variety of different candidates for the Republicans standing for Senate seats - there's not the same central control of candidates and political messaging that we see imposed on MPs in the British party system. This means that some Republican senate candidates, in some states, are likely to be better at finding the support of their voters than others, and so holding on against your potential Democrat tsunami.
The contrast with the Republicans is quite stark. In order to win a two-thirds majority they only need to win all the senate seats instates up to New Hampshire, and one in Maine, where the Partisan Voter Index is only D+2.
I'm not sure why the Democrats have managed to remain competitive in the Senate. The Republicans have done a lot better in the national popular vote in the House elections than they have in Presidential elections, so maybe the Democrats have tended to choose stronger candidates for Senate elections.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
The casually racist post I referred to earlier this evening wasn’t one of his polemics (which I’m sort of inured to), it was someone else. I can’t be sure whether it was the poster’s own view or they were illustrating the views of others (albeit sympathetically). But it did shock me that such comments seem to pass without the shock they might have generated a few years ago.
They posted on here earlier today saying it was a joke, intended as a parody.
It was so overtly racist I thought it was a joke too, hence my response.
But this is becoming a bit of a theme online. Says racist thing - "just kidding bro". The malicious twinkle in the eye. We saw a lot of that at the Trump rally.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
I'm not sure why the Democrats have managed to remain competitive in the Senate. The Republicans have done a lot better in the national popular vote in the House elections than they have in Presidential elections, so maybe the Democrats have tended to choose stronger candidates for Senate elections.
I think we know the answer to this one, GOP primary voters just keep choosing terrible candidates in winnable races.
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action (I never knew the real history behind how it came about).
I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
Off topic and on topic have the same initialism, so the abbreviation is pointless.
It's normally possible to infer by context.
Then why bother with the clutter of the abbreviation?
Why bother with most words? It's there, as with most Britishisms, as an apology for steering the conversation elsewhere. We could iron out 90% of the words we use here and just shout TRUMP BAD! and SKS BUFFOON! and HERE IS NICE PICTURE! but a bit of contextual syntax eases the reader in more pleasantly and makes the conversation flow.
It’s amazing how little media attention Musks hardship comments got . Gutting spending on services to essentially keep giving tax cuts that favour the rich.
I'm still trying to get my head around the Trump-Musk dynamic. Both are using the other but to what extent do they believe or accept that they're being used? And are their assumptions correct - or if they're not (and they are almost certainly not), then what happens when reality intervenes.
That intervention may happen pretty quickly. Trump is an America-only operative and his politics smack of that isolationist mindset. Musk, with Starlink and Twitter is a global player, and with Tesla is a global businessman. Tariffs on China are an obvious point of contention between them, as is Trump's attitude to EVs.
On the other hand, to be an ally and brain of Trump is to have something close to immunity - and no doubt potentially government contracts. But does it go beyond that? Is Musk after acquiring the MAGA movement itself? I wouldn't put it past him.
(Yes, Musk was born in South Africa. That needn't be an impediment to his seeking the presidency. I can think of at least three ways by which he, enabled by Trump and compliant Republicans could get around that)
As someone just sent me this, it seems appropriate. Replace 'HOVER' with 'BRACE' as you see fit. No mention of the diverse tasks involving sipping a cheeky ${drink} while at ${location} mind you. :
🤖 Humanoids are expected to be the ultimate embodiment for general-purpose robots, but reaching that potential means adapting to diverse tasks—navigation, tabletop manipulation, loco-manipulation—each needing unique control modes.
🤔 Can one controller handle it all? ✨ Introducing HOVER:
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action (I never knew the real history behind how it came about).
I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
Off topic and on topic have the same initialism, so the abbreviation is pointless.
It's normally possible to infer by context.
Then why bother with the clutter of the abbreviation?
Why bother with most words? It's there, as with most Britishisms, as an apology for steering the conversation elsewhere. We could iron out 90% of the words we use here and just shout TRUMP BAD! and SKS BUFFOON! and HERE IS NICE PICTURE! but a bit of contextual syntax eases the reader in more pleasantly and makes the conversation flow.
"Doubleplusgood picture" is so insta-friendly though.
(it's also occasionally popped into my programmer head that the form `++good` was a cry for help from earlier programmers)
Sundar Pichai said on the earnings call today that more than 25% of all new code at Google is now generated by AI.
LLMs don't write code, they just regurgitate variations of code segments they've been trained on. If you ask an AI to produce a bubble sort routine it'll give you one (which I guess is where the 25% comes from, easy boilerplate code) but they're terrible at actually stitching those segments into something useful. That's the reason they don't really work for HDL code, because the interactions between various segments of code are so much more critical - it's easy to produce completely valid code that simply doesn't work, or worse mostly works but with subtle failures.
If your job is writing Python scripts, fear AI. Otherwise I'd not be too concerned.
FPT, Nevada, I think the Republicans are knocking it out of the park. That’s the obvious inference from early voting.
But, it does not mean that they will do so in every State.
Well, you could infer that a lot of the early voting registered Republicans in Nevada are in fact Harris voting ones, but that seems a bit optimistic to rely upon.
Not really, it actually hits the nail on the head. Nobody, not the Rackety Ralston or anybody, knows who these votes are for, only who they are registered.
Imo the number of Registered GOP voting Harris in this election will be massive. Are the Cheney and Bush not registered republicans?
We should all be on the same page, that nationwide Trump has found many new supporters, amongst the young of all colours. This is a known known. And we half suspect, these not drawn to him personally, not won through love of MAGA and of Trump, but, in a house divided - reference Janet Ganesh FT on more than 20 years of elections shows a constant divided nation on politics and issues - twentysomething thirtysomething voters will be drawn to one of two platforms, guns or control, woman’s rights or abortion restrictions etc, whilst leaders of platforms come and go, like Trump now representing just half of the divide, is just immaterial, ephemeral to these platform voters.
But, new voters in the wrong part of the bigger picture this time can dilute his EC precision and efficiency, there in previous elections. Trump closer in the PV can still equate to a comprehensive EC drubbing, Harris gaining the votes of Cheney and Bush tribes, can I believe improve Dem vote efficiency and precision.
Whatever the result, Trump holding college educated and independent voters in the swing states, those who vote more on details, than broad brush like cost of living, holding them this time to the level he enjoyed in 2016 and 2020, and to cancel out the registered Republican losses that will happen, would be a surprise to me. To me, some voters have clearly sussed him, and the whole pointlessness of ongoing disruption and knocking down, ripping up, without the necessary reward and benefits of subsequently putting back together with something better.
Trump and MAGA was always time limited, before it was seriously asked: do we end up building back better after all this disruption? Win all lose - I still call it for Trump - the loss of the Cheney and Bush tribes from the Big Teepee are clear signals, in smoke on a light blue horizon, of the decline of Trumpism and MAGA. This election perhaps even its final fall.
If Trump loses, he is a spent political force. The extent to which Vance can carry the MAGA torch forward is questionable.
The prize of a Harris victory is a Republican Party trying to refind its base - and probably failing for at least one Presidential and a series of House and Senate elections. Harris could potentially have a huge majority in the House and potentially a two-thirds majority across Congress. That would allow checks to be put in place on corrupt Supreme Court justices with a series of specified standards to which they must adhere - and possibly term limits. It allows Rowe v Wade to be reinstated. It could spell the end of gerrymandering and voter suppression, all of which the right would be powerless to prevent - cuz Donald Trump.
A two-thirds Democrat majority in the Senate would require winning both Senators in every State up to Kansas, and one in Missouri, where the Cook Partisan Voter Index is R+10. This would mean winning both Senators in Florida, North Carolina, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Alaska and South Carolina. And even then, you'd have to convince all these Democratic Senators who are representing quite red states, to put their seats in peril by passing contentious reforms.
Another factor that would make it difficult to achieve is that the somewhat more fragmented and individual nature of party politics in the US, means that you'd have a variety of different candidates for the Republicans standing for Senate seats - there's not the same central control of candidates and political messaging that we see imposed on MPs in the British party system. This means that some Republican senate candidates, in some states, are likely to be better at finding the support of their voters than others, and so holding on against your potential Democrat tsunami.
The contrast with the Republicans is quite stark. In order to win a two-thirds majority they only need to win all the senate seats instates up to New Hampshire, and one in Maine, where the Partisan Voter Index is only D+2.
I'm not sure why the Democrats have managed to remain competitive in the Senate. The Republicans have done a lot better in the national popular vote in the House elections than they have in Presidential elections, so maybe the Democrats have tended to choose stronger candidates for Senate elections.
The number of crap candidates the GOP have put up in winnable senate races is now well into double figures.
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action (I never knew the real history behind how it came about).
I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
Off topic and on topic have the same initialism, so the abbreviation is pointless.
It's normally possible to infer by context.
Then why bother with the clutter of the abbreviation?
Why bother with most words? It's there, as with most Britishisms, as an apology for steering the conversation elsewhere. We could iron out 90% of the words we use here and just shout TRUMP BAD! and SKS BUFFOON! and HERE IS NICE PICTURE! but a bit of contextual syntax eases the reader in more pleasantly and makes the conversation flow.
Sure, but if one must, one could spend the extra 0.05 of a second writing it out.
I have resigned myself to a Trump victory. America is utterly doomed.
I hope Harris wins but I don't think a Trump victory will make much difference to the long-term future of the USA.
Dem campaign manager has put out a video saying 'We're not losing'.
Maybe it is some 4-d chess cleverness with GOTV but to me it reads like precisely the opposite and the whiff of defeat.
Trump 2.0 is one week away.
That’s not what she said or did. It was an update on the state of the race as she saw it. She might be wrong or right this time, but she got it spot on in 2020.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Leon clearly wanted a break, no chance at all he believes this. He might be a total muppet but he's not a racist.
If someone keeps showing you who they are, believe them.
Yes but I don't know what Leon is actually like. He's had so many personalities, it's hard to know what he or isn't. I just don't think he's actually a racist, that's all. I think he wrote a very stupid post, in an attempt to garner a reaction. The post was worthy of a ban, I wasn't disputing that. Just that he's not actually a racist.
He's a troll. A boring troll. But not a racist - and I will stand by that without any more evidence.
And I absolutely despise the person. Everyone knows that.
The problem is that, even if someone isn’t “actually a racist”, spouting racist shit, even if only “ironically” in their own mind, gives aid & comfort to actual racists by telling them that their shit is OK.
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
NB, I would hope Leon falls into the former rather than the latter camp but once you start talking about “white babies” you can’t be surprised if people take it badly. It’s a hop, skip and a jump from there to the 14 words after all.
The casually racist post I referred to earlier this evening wasn’t one of his polemics (which I’m sort of inured to), it was someone else. I can’t be sure whether it was the poster’s own view or they were illustrating the views of others (albeit sympathetically). But it did shock me that such comments seem to pass without the shock they might have generated a few years ago.
They posted on here earlier today saying it was a joke, intended as a parody.
It was so overtly racist I thought it was a joke too, hence my response.
But this is becoming a bit of a theme online. Says racist thing - "just kidding bro". The malicious twinkle in the eye. We saw a lot of that at the Trump rally.
Joke or not most people just piss off because they've got better things to do than read that sort of crap and for those who like it-and there are a few on here-they can surely navigate their way to 'Stormfront'.
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action (I never knew the real history behind how it came about).
I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
Off topic and on topic have the same initialism, so the abbreviation is pointless.
It's normally possible to infer by context.
Then why bother with the clutter of the abbreviation?
Why bother with most words? It's there, as with most Britishisms, as an apology for steering the conversation elsewhere. We could iron out 90% of the words we use here and just shout TRUMP BAD! and SKS BUFFOON! and HERE IS NICE PICTURE! but a bit of contextual syntax eases the reader in more pleasantly and makes the conversation flow.
Sure, but if one must, one could spend the extra 0.05 of a second writing it out.
It is an ornate sort of vestigial politeness cum pretension to indicate that your post on PB is about to be off topic - almost all of our posts are off topic.
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action (I never knew the real history behind how it came about).
I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
Off topic and on topic have the same initialism, so the abbreviation is pointless.
It's normally possible to infer by context.
Then why bother with the clutter of the abbreviation?
Why bother with most words? It's there, as with most Britishisms, as an apology for steering the conversation elsewhere. We could iron out 90% of the words we use here and just shout TRUMP BAD! and SKS BUFFOON! and HERE IS NICE PICTURE! but a bit of contextual syntax eases the reader in more pleasantly and makes the conversation flow.
Sure, but if one must, one could spend the extra 0.05 of a second writing it out.
It is an ornate sort of vestigial politeness cum pretension to indicate that your post on PB is about to be off topic - almost all of our posts are off topic.
Well indeed. One might be better ‘warning’ of an on topic contribution.
Sundar Pichai said on the earnings call today that more than 25% of all new code at Google is now generated by AI.
LLMs don't write code, they just regurgitate variations of code segments they've been trained on. If you ask an AI to produce a bubble sort routine it'll give you one (which I guess is where the 25% comes from, easy boilerplate code) but they're terrible at actually stitching those segments into something useful. That's the reason they don't really work for HDL code, because the interactions between various segments of code are so much more critical - it's easy to produce completely valid code that simply doesn't work, or worse mostly works but with subtle failures.
If your job is writing Python scripts, fear AI. Otherwise I'd not be too concerned.
Not sure it is true about can't stitch things together these days. Some LLM's have very large context windows, editors are increasingly capable of scanning codebase and together able to suggest how to stitch things together.
I find they are also pretty effective at given mathematical formulae turning that into code. And these are from state of the art research papers, so aren't just trivial or regurgitated from Stack Overflow.
I would say that LLMs suggestions probably end up writing (by this I mean suggesting and I accept) more than 25% now. Things like Supermaven is very good at suggesting a whole bunch of lines in one go, rather than the old school auto-complete a line.
I would be concerned if your job is lots of boilerplate, that isn't just writing python script, as they won't be needing all of you.
Ron Filipkowski @RonFilipkowski · 1h Coincidentally, a random voter from Puerto Rico happened to show up at Trump’s event today to say that she and all Puerto Ricans still support him.
I have resigned myself to a Trump victory. America is utterly doomed.
I hope Harris wins but I don't think a Trump victory will make much difference to the long-term future of the USA.
Dem campaign manager has put out a video saying 'We're not losing'.
Maybe it is some 4-d chess cleverness with GOTV but to me it reads like precisely the opposite and the whiff of defeat.
Trump 2.0 is one week away.
That’s not what she said or did. It was an update on the state of the race as she saw it. She might be wrong or right this time, but she got it spot on in 2020.
This US election is characterised by people seeing what they want to see and saying what they want to hear. There is no attempt to listen to the other side. 40% are firmly one side, another 40% firmly the other side, with the remaining 20% wishing they had a decent candidate to vote for. It is awful that whoever wins is likely to try to pull US society further to their direction, damaging aspects of who and what the US is. So so sad.
Comments
But, new voters in the wrong part of the bigger picture this time can dilute his EC precision and efficiency, there in previous elections. Trump closer in the PV can still equate to a comprehensive EC drubbing, Harris gaining the votes of Cheney and Bush tribes, can I believe improve Dem vote efficiency and precision.
Whatever the result, Trump holding college educated and independent voters in the swing states, those who vote more on details, than broad brush like cost of living, holding them this time to the level he enjoyed in 2016 and 2020, and to cancel out the registered Republican losses that will happen, would be a surprise to me. To me, some voters have clearly sussed him, and the whole pointlessness of ongoing disruption and knocking down, ripping up, without the necessary reward and benefits of subsequently putting back together with something better.
Trump and MAGA was always time limited, before it was seriously asked: do we end up building back better after all this disruption? Win all lose - I still call it for Trump - the loss of the Cheney and Bush tribes from the Big Teepee are clear signals, in smoke on a light blue horizon, of the decline of Trumpism and MAGA. This election perhaps even its final fall.
https://x.com/SwannMarcus89/status/1848836946602430956
In other words, in 2021, Nevada introduced auto-registration for those who aren't when you sign up for a driver's licence etc and it doesn't do so with a party. For that reason there's a lot more people who register as independents than before the law came in.
That may make it difficult to extrapolate on previous EV figures as this is the first Presidential election with that law in place.
Look, some piece of advice. If you can't focus on the large picture, focus on the small. Old mathematical trick: simplify the problem to one which you can cope with, then work on that ("assume the can opener" as the old joke has it). For me it's Nevada, with good odds either side, lots of info, and the only decider is my skill and judgement. You may pick others, and Robert believes that Georgia may flip for example. If our business is finding value and the large seam defeats us, let us find a smaller one that fits our pickaxe. Don't get tied up over problems you can't solve: we can't fix the world but we can fix the small bits with our small hands.
It wasn't credible if people said Biden hadn't slowed down since 2020, and it isn't credible for Trump. How many actually beleive it? IDK, maybe half his supporters?
Plus the majority of people of pretend to ironic, edgy racism turn out to be actually racist in reality in my experience regardless. They just don’t want to own up to it, so they nod & wink around the subject in the hope of identifying like minded people without bringing down on themselves the opprobrium of everyone else in the process.
https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1851024675029074057
Nor should they do everything Trump might want, just from a practical perspective - a President is for 4-8 years, they are there for decades, as politicians themselves they have a lot of power and their own political objectives to achieve on the court over the long game.
(That they should not be politicians is true but so improbable it's not worth delving into).
He’s saying he doesn’t want to live in a country with a different population mix. That’s not necessarily a racist view - he’s been raving about Japan - but it is nativist.
Or am I just making all this up, like a dream sequence?
https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/international/german-gdp-expected-contract-2024-and-stagnate-2025-dihk
But here's the thing. It's a hell of a lot easier to let an excessive savings rate (Germany's problem) normalize, than the other way around.
They have a different perspective, can afford to be more subtle most of the time, and for most everyday cases (such as exist in relative terms) which come before the court they can see there is either no major issue to make into a political fight so deal with on its own terms, so their political goals are not going to influence it significantly, or they are smart enough to know when potential gain is not worth the cost of pushing against something settled. The 2020 cases are a good example - there's probably a few on the court who would like to have helped in some way, but there was nothing, despite Trump's efforts, they could have really hung it on even had they wanted, and no way coudl they get a majority to do so.
(Yes, I'm sure the reasoning was more complicated than that).
That he might be entirely misguided is another matter.
The prize of a Harris victory is a Republican Party trying to refind its base - and probably failing for at least one Presidential and a series of House and Senate elections. Harris could potentially have a huge majority in the House and potentially a two-thirds majority across Congress. That would allow checks to be put in place on corrupt Supreme Court justices with a series of specified standards to which they must adhere - and possibly term limits. It allows Rowe v Wade to be reinstated. It could spell the end of gerrymandering and voter suppression, all of which the right would be powerless to prevent - cuz Donald Trump.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyvj5yev9no
This seems like one of those stories that will get little attention, pass everybody by, but probably will end up having a big impact on policy.
“And every four years, we will have suburban housewives in Pennsylvania choose a new president.”
“Just Pennsylvania, sir?”
“And Wisconsin and Michigan. And maybe Arizona, as a treat.”
“No one else can vote, sir?”
“They can vote but it won’t matter.”
https://x.com/ZenOfDesign/status/1851071382811029787
I could run an argument that preferring the racial mix of one’s country not to change is not NECESSARILY racist because you are not necessarily saying one race is objectively better.
But I am not going to, because in the context of the thread he knew he was effectively talking about posters, their children, and their grandchildren. And that’s, at best, rude and nasty.
Also enjoyed this tidbit about the contest in Alaska:
Alaska already has this system in place and one of the “Democrat” candidates in the general election for Alaska’s sole House seat, Eric Hafner is in prison in New York and has reportedly never even been to Alaska
Reminded me of a Discworld novel where all politicians were put into gaol as soon as they were elected. Because it saved time.
Apparently they have no problem with an American one
"Learn to code" slogan isn't looking like such good advice anymore....
Biden wasn't fit for the job and Trump isn't fit for the job.
Both have declined in the last four years and for the same reasons of ageing and stress.
The decline caused by ageing is inevitable given their ages, the decline caused by stress is also inevitable given what they've been doing during the past four years.
The only questions there might be are:
1) Who is most unfit mentally to be President
2) Who has declined the most
3) Whether it was ageing or stress that caused most of the decline
A local Indiana GOP official cried foul after a voting machine test resulted in an inaccurate count.
It turns out that's because he stole ballots. It was caught on video. He's charged with a crime.
https://x.com/AaronBlake/status/1851369052641337612
Their macroeconomic illiteracy has been obvious for decades - see the way they handled the German reunification, the euro, the EU's stability pact, and now the masochistic Schwarze Null.
It's only Germany's superb supply side and in particular cheap Russian gas that has enabled Germany to do relatively well in a sclerotic continent. Where Germany's future growth is going to come from is not obvious.
If the Conservatives had been serious about reversing climate legislation they would have done so. In the end, it was just virtue signalling ahead of the election.
That their independence was won with substantial help from Louis XVI is very much the ironic icing on that particular cake.
I only stepped away for two hours.
https://x.com/stormchaserukeu/status/1851386483741171962?s=46
The usual kind of setup: stuck low pressure pattern, moist onshore winds from a very warm Mediterranean, nothing shifting anytime soon.
This Single Rule Underpins All of Physics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q10_srZ-pbs
This is quite a brilliant explanation of the principle of least action (I never knew the real history behind how it came about).
I remember when the BBC used to do stuff like this.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/29/britain-high-paid-workforce-slumps-record-low-reeves-budget/
One question I would like to know, as well as large numbers of people coming to the UK, we have had over the past few years a large number of people leaving. Be interesting to know how many were high earners.
Another factor that would make it difficult to achieve is that the somewhat more fragmented and individual nature of party politics in the US, means that you'd have a variety of different candidates for the Republicans standing for Senate seats - there's not the same central control of candidates and political messaging that we see imposed on MPs in the British party system. This means that some Republican senate candidates, in some states, are likely to be better at finding the support of their voters than others, and so holding on against your potential Democrat tsunami.
The contrast with the Republicans is quite stark. In order to win a two-thirds majority they only need to win all the senate seats instates up to New Hampshire, and one in Maine, where the Partisan Voter Index is only D+2.
I'm not sure why the Democrats have managed to remain competitive in the Senate. The Republicans have done a lot better in the national popular vote in the House elections than they have in Presidential elections, so maybe the Democrats have tended to choose stronger candidates for Senate elections.
But this is becoming a bit of a theme online. Says racist thing - "just kidding bro". The malicious twinkle in the eye. We saw a lot of that at the Trump rally.
That intervention may happen pretty quickly. Trump is an America-only operative and his politics smack of that isolationist mindset. Musk, with Starlink and Twitter is a global player, and with Tesla is a global businessman. Tariffs on China are an obvious point of contention between them, as is Trump's attitude to EVs.
On the other hand, to be an ally and brain of Trump is to have something close to immunity - and no doubt potentially government contracts. But does it go beyond that? Is Musk after acquiring the MAGA movement itself? I wouldn't put it past him.
(Yes, Musk was born in South Africa. That needn't be an impediment to his seeking the presidency. I can think of at least three ways by which he, enabled by Trump and compliant Republicans could get around that)
https://x.com/tairanhe99/status/1851344550327173482
🤖 Humanoids are expected to be the ultimate embodiment for general-purpose robots, but reaching that potential means adapting to diverse tasks—navigation, tabletop manipulation, loco-manipulation—each needing unique control modes.
🤔 Can one controller handle it all?
✨ Introducing HOVER:
(it's also occasionally popped into my programmer head that the form `++good` was a cry for help from earlier programmers)
https://downloads.bbc.co.uk/commissioning/site/tariff_prices_for_independents.pdf
Linear TV is expensive. I dislike this trend that you have to have a celebrity with factual programmes.
Maybe it is some 4-d chess cleverness with GOTV but to me it reads like precisely the opposite and the whiff of defeat.
Trump 2.0 is one week away.
If your job is writing Python scripts, fear AI. Otherwise I'd not be too concerned.
I find they are also pretty effective at given mathematical formulae turning that into code. And these are from state of the art research papers, so aren't just trivial or regurgitated from Stack Overflow.
I would say that LLMs suggestions probably end up writing (by this I mean suggesting and I accept) more than 25% now. Things like Supermaven is very good at suggesting a whole bunch of lines in one go, rather than the old school auto-complete a line.
I would be concerned if your job is lots of boilerplate, that isn't just writing python script, as they won't be needing all of you.
Ron Filipkowski
@RonFilipkowski
·
1h
Coincidentally, a random voter from Puerto Rico happened to show up at Trump’s event today to say that she and all Puerto Ricans still support him.
https://x.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1851379406301974559
Ukraine and Russia are discussing halting strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure, with Qatar mediating.
Previous attempts were close to a deal in August – until Russia pulled out over Ukraine’s Kursk incursion.