Trump really needs to go after his enemies hard, now
He’s the most powerful man in the world and will be for four years. He’s learned from 2016 that he can’t fuck around
Woke must be destroyed. Cancel all D.E.I. initiatives. Jail everyone that tried to jail him. Hi after the lab leak deniers - jail them too. Think about closing down Harvard and the New York Times. Make it compulsory to eat veal and foie gras for breakfast
And deport anyone who complains and deport them to Haiti but give them a cat to keep them going, thereby saving America’s birdlife. NO MORE PETS
The veal and foie gras will need to be home grown to avoid those punitive tariffs.
I don’t know if they’re into veal there but they make good FG in upper New York State.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
Now rest is politics is now making it is Trans issue....especially among black people...wot lost it...shakes head.
Quote I just saw on Twitter but can’t find again. “Democrats are just realising that women buy eggs and bread more often than they have abortions”.
Yes, I think voters hate inflation. The Dems possibly should have said Trump policies will increase prices...
It was worse than that, the Dem message was that inflation is falling yay aren’t we good, while everyone could see that their weekly shopping basket is 50% more expensive than it was four years ago.
Trump' policies are all inflationary.. So I am not buying the economy argument... it is tribal identity politics. People are willing to take a hit to their economy for their identity.
Tariffs creating inflation is too complex for most voters to understand.
All they see is cheap foreign goods which could be made in America.
The way tariffs result in higher prices is a multi step process and people’s eyes gloss over after step 1
Democrats spent the final weeks of the campaign browbeating and shaming black and brown voters and telling them basically that they were stupid to even consider voting for Trump. This is what they got in return.
Back! Well shit in a bag and punch it. Its January 1933.
Was hyperbole in fashion then?
It would seem! Germany voted in Hitler knowing what he was. America is voting in Trump knowing what he is. And in any election you always get the correct result because you get what you vote for. And America has voted for Gilead. Up and down the ticket it appears.
Whilst this is a massive risk for Europe, perhaps it is also an opportunity. An open door policy to welcome those fleeing fascism.
Because people *will* flee.
I think you're getting carried away here...
I am? Perhaps. Lets see how this plays out shall we. There will be a significant number of people very scared tonight who can cite with evidence what the GOP are doing to threaten their lives. Not your life, so calling it out is getting carried away. But its happening.
Well they ACTUALLY tried to kill Trump. Twice. So this bleating isn’t coming from the moral high ground, not in the way you think
Now rest is politics is now making it is Trans issue....especially among black people...wot lost it...shakes head.
Quote I just saw on Twitter but can’t find again. “Democrats are just realising that women buy eggs and bread more often than they have abortions”.
Yes, I think voters hate inflation. The Dems possibly should have said Trump policies will increase prices...
It was worse than that, the Dem message was that inflation is falling yay aren’t we good, while everyone could see that their weekly shopping basket is 50% more expensive than it was four years ago.
Trump' policies are all inflationary.. So I am not buying the economy argument... it is tribal identity politics. People are willing to take a hit to their economy for their identity.
Tariffs creating inflation is too complex for most voters to understand.
All they see is cheap foreign goods which could be made in America.
The way tariffs result in higher prices is a multi step process and people’s eyes gloss over after step 1
Is that true though? It was one of the most straightforward things for everyone to get their heads around during Brexit. Even the hardest of Brexiteers was reassuring the country they wouldn’t face tariffs on imports.
I am assuming that the Trump victory we're now all expecting is down to the economy. There are a range of different factors in play as well, obviously, but in this crucial respect it's exactly like what happened in this country - too many losers from the status quo, punishing the incumbent party. Obviously there hasn't been the kind of dramatic shift in levels of support that we saw earlier in the year simply because the American political system is very different and the electorate is so much more polarised, but all the same.
The main implication of this result for this country ought to be the realisation that The West as a bloc isn't a thing and Britain should look to its own defences, but that won't happen in any meaningful way because the Government lacks the will to find and allocate the required resources. So, no change here.
How about we stop giving all the money to feckin train drivers and buy some more cruise missiles!
The money that has been allocated to deal with public sector pay disputes is comparatively small beer and has been well spent. The big issue, which the previous Government did nothing to confront and this one doesn't want to talk about either because it is too bloody difficult, is the demographic trap and the dependency ratio. There's no route to a healthy and sustainable economy that doesn't involve a substantial redistribution of resources from the retired to workers. Improving the health of the average citizen, by shifting priorities in healthcare and especially by using policy to try to force down the number of lumbering fatties in the land is also relevant, but fundamentally the country can afford neither to keep the (better off) elderly in the style to which they have become accustomed - there are too bloody many of them - nor to continue to leave all the wealth locked away in their houses untouched.
Until the collective realisation dawns that the country has to respond meaningfully to the combined burden of advancing age, ill health, sedentary lifestyles and obesity that is crushing it to death, we will continue to circle the plughole. And let's just say that I'm not exactly brimming with confidence that this is going to happen.
Lumbering fatties aren't the problem, it is dementia that means people are incapable of independent life for years.
Now rest is politics is now making it is Trans issue....especially among black people...wot lost it...shakes head.
Quote I just saw on Twitter but can’t find again. “Democrats are just realising that women buy eggs and bread more often than they have abortions”.
Yes, I think voters hate inflation. The Dems possibly should have said Trump policies will increase prices...
It was worse than that, the Dem message was that inflation is falling yay aren’t we good, while everyone could see that their weekly shopping basket is 50% more expensive than it was four years ago.
Trump' policies are all inflationary.. So I am not buying the economy argument... it is tribal identity politics. People are willing to take a hit to their economy for their identity.
Tariffs creating inflation is too complex for most voters to understand.
All they see is cheap foreign goods which could be made in America.
The way tariffs result in higher prices is a multi step process and people’s eyes gloss over after step 1
Is that true though? It was one of the most straightforward things for everyone to get their heads around during Brexit. Even the hardest of Brexiteers was reassuring the country they wouldn’t face tariffs on imports.
The US economy ≠ the UK economy. They don't need imports of goods in the same way.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
The most important thing to me now is that European countries choose to take a hold of their own destiny and back Ukraine to win - whatever it takes. I don't want to hear Starmer mouthing platitudes and solemnly committing to sticking to Britain's £3bn pa level of support. I want to see action commensurate with the reality of what defeat in Ukraine would look like for the threat to British and European security, and a major increase in support to help Ukraine achieve victory.
That means some extra billions for increasing British defence production. Some billions for Ukrainian defence production. And some billions to buy munitions from America for Ukraine. It probably does no harm diplomatically to be the first European country to commit to spending billions on American weapons after Trump decides not to spend money on sending them to Ukraine.
It would also help, in a small way, if Ireland could grow up and ditch neutrality. The "neutral, but not neutral" formulation just doesn't work.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
On reflection the relative movement of GBP and EUR overnight does make sense given our trade weighting. UK exports to the US are dominated by services that don’t attract customs duty (unless the Republicans decide to extend the BEAT to unconnected party transactions, which seems unlikely even if Trump might like the idea).
For those who haven’t seen it yet, Elon Musk’s interview with Rogan was interesting on the subject of tariffs. Musk runs a manufacturing business, and says that you need to phase in over time to allow the supply chain to adjust slowly, otherwise it just causes price inflation.
The House race still looks fascinating. Republicans have gained one seat, but DecisionDesk reckon it could finish 218-217 to the Dems.
OK, lets play the scenario. Trump wins the presidency with a decent margin of victory. The GOP have taken the Senate and the SC. What can the House do to stop enabling acts or bills to remove rights & legal status from American citizens?
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
In January 1933, Hitler did not immediately become a dictator. When he became chancellor, Germany’s democratic constitution was still in effect. However, Hitler transformed Germany by manipulating the democratic political system. Hitler and other Nazi leaders used existing laws to destroy German democracy and create a dictatorship.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
President Buttleig
If the US is still not ready for a woman President, I genuinely don't think they will vote for a gay man. Not to mention that he has no job to serve as a platform to pitch for the Presidency. The Dems are going to toil to recover from this.
The House race still looks fascinating. Republicans have gained one seat, but DecisionDesk reckon it could finish 218-217 to the Dems.
OK, lets play the scenario. Trump wins the presidency with a decent margin of victory. The GOP have taken the Senate and the SC. What can the House do to stop enabling acts or bills to remove rights & legal status from American citizens?
What do you mean by “rights and legal status from American citizens”?
The most important thing to me now is that European countries choose to take a hold of their own destiny and back Ukraine to win - whatever it takes. I don't want to hear Starmer mouthing platitudes and solemnly committing to sticking to Britain's £3bn pa level of support. I want to see action commensurate with the reality of what defeat in Ukraine would look like for the threat to British and European security, and a major increase in support to help Ukraine achieve victory.
That means some extra billions for increasing British defence production. Some billions for Ukrainian defence production. And some billions to buy munitions from America for Ukraine. It probably does no harm diplomatically to be the first European country to commit to spending billions on American weapons after Trump decides not to spend money on sending them to Ukraine.
It would also help, in a small way, if Ireland could grow up and ditch neutrality. The "neutral, but not neutral" formulation just doesn't work.
The British Government isn't about to spend a fortune on trying to rescue Ukraine. Where would it find the extra money? It's all too difficult politically.
Ireland does fantastically well from a position of well-heeled piety in which the grubby business of shooting people is subcontracted to the nasty Brits at zero cost to its own Treasury. There is no reason to suppose that this will change.
The House race still looks fascinating. Republicans have gained one seat, but DecisionDesk reckon it could finish 218-217 to the Dems.
OK, lets play the scenario. Trump wins the presidency with a decent margin of victory. The GOP have taken the Senate and the SC. What can the House do to stop enabling acts or bills to remove rights & legal status from American citizens?
What do you mean by “rights and legal status from American citizens”?
Well, we could have a market on whether Vance would try to invoke the 25th - and whether the Dems would vote to block it on the grounds an addled Trump is rather less dangerous than an energetic Vance in charge.
Now rest is politics is now making it is Trans issue....especially among black people...wot lost it...shakes head.
Quote I just saw on Twitter but can’t find again. “Democrats are just realising that women buy eggs and bread more often than they have abortions”.
Yes, I think voters hate inflation. The Dems possibly should have said Trump policies will increase prices...
It was worse than that, the Dem message was that inflation is falling yay aren’t we good, while everyone could see that their weekly shopping basket is 50% more expensive than it was four years ago.
Trump' policies are all inflationary.. So I am not buying the economy argument... it is tribal identity politics. People are willing to take a hit to their economy for their identity.
Seems to be magical thinking by some voters that Trump II will somehow transport the US back to a time before COVID and the war in Ukraine.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
In January 1933, Hitler did not immediately become a dictator. When he became chancellor, Germany’s democratic constitution was still in effect. However, Hitler transformed Germany by manipulating the democratic political system. Hitler and other Nazi leaders used existing laws to destroy German democracy and create a dictatorship.
There truly is open denial going on - and its not from us dripping-wet liberals. Its from the right. No no, he isn't fascist. That dictionary definition is wrong, you can't look at what he Says and Does and take that as roof of what he says and does, you can set aside the lived experience of 4-star Marine Corp Generals and their ilk because they are wusses who definitely didn't serve the man or know what they are talking about.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
President Buttleig
If the US is still not ready for a woman President, I genuinely don't think they will vote for a gay man. Not to mention that he has no job to serve as a platform to pitch for the Presidency. The Dems are going to toil to recover from this.
You're probably right.
I reckon it is misogyny that has caused this disaster.
Now rest is politics is now making it is Trans issue....especially among black people...wot lost it...shakes head.
Quote I just saw on Twitter but can’t find again. “Democrats are just realising that women buy eggs and bread more often than they have abortions”.
Yes, I think voters hate inflation. The Dems possibly should have said Trump policies will increase prices...
It was worse than that, the Dem message was that inflation is falling yay aren’t we good, while everyone could see that their weekly shopping basket is 50% more expensive than it was four years ago.
Trump' policies are all inflationary.. So I am not buying the economy argument... it is tribal identity politics. People are willing to take a hit to their economy for their identity.
Tariffs creating inflation is too complex for most voters to understand.
All they see is cheap foreign goods which could be made in America.
The way tariffs result in higher prices is a multi step process and people’s eyes gloss over after step 1
Is that true though? It was one of the most straightforward things for everyone to get their heads around during Brexit. Even the hardest of Brexiteers was reassuring the country they wouldn’t face tariffs on imports.
I think it's one of those things where people assume that, if it were true that tariffs would massively increase inflation then Trump definitely wouldn't do that so, because it's his policy, then it must not cause inflation, or he'll only do the tariffs on things where it wouldn't cause inflation, or something.
Essentially people have enough trust in Trump that they can't believe he would do something so stupid, even though he says he would do something that stupid. So the thing can't be stupid.
For those who haven’t seen it yet, Elon Musk’s interview with Rogan was interesting on the subject of tariffs. Musk runs a manufacturing business, and says that you need to phase in over time to allow the supply chain to adjust slowly, otherwise it just causes price inflation.
Musk runs a hype business, one part of which is manufacturing. The main product is himself.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
In January 1933, Hitler did not immediately become a dictator. When he became chancellor, Germany’s democratic constitution was still in effect. However, Hitler transformed Germany by manipulating the democratic political system. Hitler and other Nazi leaders used existing laws to destroy German democracy and create a dictatorship.
There truly is open denial going on - and its not from us dripping-wet liberals. Its from the right. No no, he isn't fascist. That dictionary definition is wrong, you can't look at what he Says and Does and take that as roof of what he says and does, you can set aside the lived experience of 4-star Marine Corp Generals and their ilk because they are wusses who definitely didn't serve the man or know what they are talking about.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
In January 1933, Hitler did not immediately become a dictator. When he became chancellor, Germany’s democratic constitution was still in effect. However, Hitler transformed Germany by manipulating the democratic political system. Hitler and other Nazi leaders used existing laws to destroy German democracy and create a dictatorship.
There truly is open denial going on - and its not from us dripping-wet liberals. Its from the right. No no, he isn't fascist. That dictionary definition is wrong, you can't look at what he Says and Does and take that as roof of what he says and does, you can set aside the lived experience of 4-star Marine Corp Generals and their ilk because they are wusses who definitely didn't serve the man or know what they are talking about.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
President Buttleig
If the US is still not ready for a woman President, I genuinely don't think they will vote for a gay man. Not to mention that he has no job to serve as a platform to pitch for the Presidency. The Dems are going to toil to recover from this.
I did hear a vox pop on R4 yesterday morning with an otherwise articulate and not clearly stupid American chap who was rambling about the economy etc and then just blurted out “we just aren’t ready for a woman president”. It was weird to hear as you forget that people in modern developed countries could still have a belief that someone’s sex disqualifies them from a role.
Back! Well shit in a bag and punch it. Its January 1933.
Was hyperbole in fashion then?
It would seem! Germany voted in Hitler knowing what he was. America is voting in Trump knowing what he is. And in any election you always get the correct result because you get what you vote for. And America has voted for Gilead. Up and down the ticket it appears.
Whilst this is a massive risk for Europe, perhaps it is also an opportunity. An open door policy to welcome those fleeing fascism.
Because people *will* flee.
That depends how quickly change happens. People react more readily to rapid change; less so to slow change. Back on the night in 2016, I posited that the progress towards liberalism would be reversed by Trump, but slowly, over time. And that's what we've seen, with many of the changes occurring during his successor's term, because of changes Trump made to things like the supreme court.
My current thinking is that Trump is a very different man from eight years ago. He is older, more infirm, and filled with bitterness. I reckon he will want vengeance, and quickly. He has also been president before, so he knows the processes and will be able to hit the ground running. Well, staggering, at least.
The people crowing about the 'death of wokeism' may be right. What they're really crowing about is the death of liberalism. And they should ask what that means for them.
Wokeism does not equate to liberalism. A lot of “wokeism” is far from liberalism and invites division and sectarianism and “othering”, precisely the things that liberalism is against.
If “Wokeism” dies then it might allow liberalism to grow again without the extremism and pious hectoring at best, dangerous illiberal ideologies at worst.
People who screech about wokeism don't define what they mean; and people mean *many* different things by the term. It's a catch-all for "things I don't like about modern society". As such, it is often used, especially in the US, to denote very liberal things.
Heck, people in the USA have even been calling abortion rights 'woke'.
The House race still looks fascinating. Republicans have gained one seat, but DecisionDesk reckon it could finish 218-217 to the Dems.
OK, lets play the scenario. Trump wins the presidency with a decent margin of victory. The GOP have taken the Senate and the SC. What can the House do to stop enabling acts or bills to remove rights & legal status from American citizens?
What do you mean by “rights and legal status from American citizens”?
1. Removing the rights of women not to bleed to death as doctors refuse to treat them. They already are. 2. Removing the rights of American citizens to be American citizens. Trump and the GOP have said repeatedly that they will deport citizens for their crime of being the wrong ethnicity
Again, I'm not saying this, Trump is. I'm not doing this, Republicans are. You can say you choose not to believe them, and thats your choice. But they have absolutely said these things over and over and with the actions already taken in some states we know they are serious.
I am assuming that the Trump victory we're now all expecting is down to the economy. There are a range of different factors in play as well, obviously, but in this crucial respect it's exactly like what happened in this country - too many losers from the status quo, punishing the incumbent party. Obviously there hasn't been the kind of dramatic shift in levels of support that we saw earlier in the year simply because the American political system is very different and the electorate is so much more polarised, but all the same.
The main implication of this result for this country ought to be the realisation that The West as a bloc isn't a thing and Britain should look to its own defences, but that won't happen in any meaningful way because the Government lacks the will to find and allocate the required resources. So, no change here.
How about we stop giving all the money to feckin train drivers and buy some more cruise missiles!
The money that has been allocated to deal with public sector pay disputes is comparatively small beer and has been well spent. The big issue, which the previous Government did nothing to confront and this one doesn't want to talk about either because it is too bloody difficult, is the demographic trap and the dependency ratio. There's no route to a healthy and sustainable economy that doesn't involve a substantial redistribution of resources from the retired to workers. Improving the health of the average citizen, by shifting priorities in healthcare and especially by using policy to try to force down the number of lumbering fatties in the land is also relevant, but fundamentally the country can afford neither to keep the (better off) elderly in the style to which they have become accustomed - there are too bloody many of them - nor to continue to leave all the wealth locked away in their houses untouched.
Until the collective realisation dawns that the country has to respond meaningfully to the combined burden of advancing age, ill health, sedentary lifestyles and obesity that is crushing it to death, we will continue to circle the plughole. And let's just say that I'm not exactly brimming with confidence that this is going to happen.
Lumbering fatties aren't the problem, it is dementia that means people are incapable of independent life for years.
And people being frail and old.
Keeping people alive into their 90s is bloody expensive work.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
President Buttleig
If the US is still not ready for a woman President, I genuinely don't think they will vote for a gay man. Not to mention that he has no job to serve as a platform to pitch for the Presidency. The Dems are going to toil to recover from this.
Future elections will use the Putin model. November 6th is a seminal day in the history of the 21st century.
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
President Buttleig
If the US is still not ready for a woman President, I genuinely don't think they will vote for a gay man. Not to mention that he has no job to serve as a platform to pitch for the Presidency. The Dems are going to toil to recover from this.
I did hear a vox pop on R4 yesterday morning with an otherwise articulate and not clearly stupid American chap who was rambling about the economy etc and then just blurted out “we just aren’t ready for a woman president”. It was weird to hear as you forget that people in modern developed countries could still have a belief that someone’s sex disqualifies them from a role.
If sex disqualifies people Trump would be the most disqualified President ever.
I think I'm up a couple of hundred quid. Oh what could have been with a Harris win but I never wanted to take the red I had on Trump back in 2020 this time round. Objectively being heavier on Harris I still think was correct. Structurally there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem for the Democrats, they'll only be a couple of % away from the presidency in 28. They need to sort their shit in the cities though
President Buttleig
If the US is still not ready for a woman President, I genuinely don't think they will vote for a gay man. Not to mention that he has no job to serve as a platform to pitch for the Presidency. The Dems are going to toil to recover from this.
The US is ready for a female president, but not a left wing one.
The House race still looks fascinating. Republicans have gained one seat, but DecisionDesk reckon it could finish 218-217 to the Dems.
OK, lets play the scenario. Trump wins the presidency with a decent margin of victory. The GOP have taken the Senate and the SC. What can the House do to stop enabling acts or bills to remove rights & legal status from American citizens?
What do you mean by “rights and legal status from American citizens”?
1. Removing the rights of women not to bleed to death as doctors refuse to treat them. They already are. 2. Removing the rights of American citizens to be American citizens. Trump and the GOP have said repeatedly that they will deport citizens for their crime of being the wrong ethnicity
Again, I'm not saying this, Trump is. I'm not doing this, Republicans are. You can say you choose not to believe them, and thats your choice. But they have absolutely said these things over and over and with the actions already taken in some states we know they are serious.
1. Is mostly lies pushed by those arguing in favour of nine-month abortions. In any case, abortion is as issue for the States, not the Federal government. 2. What exactly has been said about deporting citizens? I’ve heard lots about deporting illegal aliens who commit crime, but not about citizens.
It's quite funny how both the BBC and CNN are experiencing real-time PTSD where they can't quite bring themselves to confirm Trump has won, still saying stuff like "edging closer" and the like.
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
I believe this was the first time a governing party in the UK interfered to the extent of officially PAYING for people to go and campaign for one side in the USA
Quite bewilderingly stupid and destructive. But then, this is Starmer’s Labour. It’s what they do
This election has already made Labour a lame duck government
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
It's a question of realpolitik, not hypocrisy. They deliberately put themselves on the wrong side of the most powerful man in the world for their own vanity.
I can see PB’s lefties are a bit depressed this morning
But cheer up. Marvel at our liberal British soft power
I just saw this on one of Seoul’s main shopping streets
Otoh the Proud Boys of PB are dying to say I told you so but apparently were too intimidated by PB lefties shouting them down to have actually told us so. Who knew they were such shrinking violets?
I can see PB’s lefties are a bit depressed this morning
But cheer up. Marvel at our liberal British soft power
I just saw this on one of Seoul’s main shopping streets
Mate, I have a HUGE grin on my face. One of astonishment, but its still a grin. Maybe a grimace. A few giggles. You can dislike the result and respect the craft.
Trump and the GOP and Musk have absolutely smashed this. And in a few short months they will be able to do literally anything they want.
Do I support him or them or anything they now stand for? No. But this is POLITICS and it is always entertaining. Even when your side gets demolished as mine just has. Because you get what you vote for any America has voted for Gilead.
St Clair County in Illinois, which is coterminous with East St Louis, is about 95% African-American. The result so far is Harris 48.7%, Trump 48.6% with 78% in.
"Oh well!! First thoughts…. The UK now needs to do one thing the left/liberals won’t like (establish strong early relationships with the Trump administration) and one thing the right won’t like (scrap all barriers to trade with Europe/increase military co-operation)."
Blame them for what? Voting? I'm not blaming them. When its an active choice being made what blame is there to apportion? This is what they want - its their country!
But it's our world. America wants protectionism and tariffs and to ally with Putin? OK - so the rest of the world needs to pull together stronger.
I've generally kept my opinions to myself this time for fear of being attacked on here by certain posters .
And that was the problem on here.
A lot of people need to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
They cost me money.
No-one on here cost you money other than yourself. Many people on here and elsewhere have said that this is such a close election that a small shift one way or the other could end up looking like a landslide compared with the polls.
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
I believe this was the first time a governing party in the UK interfered to the extent of officially PAYING for people to go and campaign for one side in the USA
Quite bewilderingly stupid and destructive. But then, this is Starmer’s Labour. It’s what they do
This election has already made Labour a lame duck government
Why do you believe this? Can I refer you to 1992 as a starter for 10.
I think this is the ultimate "get woke, go broke" example. The backlash to wokeism has been building up for the last two years as people want companies and politicians to concentrate on the stuff that really matters. Kamala was the woke candidate as @HYUFD pointed out over and over, she's been brushed aside by the same cultural phenomenon that has Hollywood and the gaming industry under siege.
Yep. And a few of our regulars even fell into the Woke takes about that too.
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
It's a question of realpolitik, not hypocrisy. They deliberately put themselves on the wrong side of the most powerful man in the world for their own vanity.
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
I believe this was the first time a governing party in the UK interfered to the extent of officially PAYING for people to go and campaign for one side in the USA
Quite bewilderingly stupid and destructive. But then, this is Starmer’s Labour. It’s what they do
This election has already made Labour a lame duck government
Why do you believe this? Can I refer you to 1992 as a starter for 10.
Don’t let the facts get in the way of a bit of propaganda. Facts dont matter as much as they did yesterday
The House race still looks fascinating. Republicans have gained one seat, but DecisionDesk reckon it could finish 218-217 to the Dems.
OK, lets play the scenario. Trump wins the presidency with a decent margin of victory. The GOP have taken the Senate and the SC. What can the House do to stop enabling acts or bills to remove rights & legal status from American citizens?
What do you mean by “rights and legal status from American citizens”?
1. Removing the rights of women not to bleed to death as doctors refuse to treat them. They already are. 2. Removing the rights of American citizens to be American citizens. Trump and the GOP have said repeatedly that they will deport citizens for their crime of being the wrong ethnicity
Again, I'm not saying this, Trump is. I'm not doing this, Republicans are. You can say you choose not to believe them, and thats your choice. But they have absolutely said these things over and over and with the actions already taken in some states we know they are serious.
1. Is mostly lies pushed by those arguing in favour of nine-month abortions. In any case, abortion is as issue for the States, not the Federal government. 2. What exactly has been said about deporting citizens? I’ve heard lots about deporting illegal aliens who commit crime, but not about citizens.
I don't know why anyone thinks the Dems have gained the House.
So far, Rep has gained 3 seats. Dem zero gains.
And Rep leading in various Dem seats - 3 in PA for starters.
It's obvious from President and Senate results that Dem will not be gaining the House.
Indeed, on the contrary the Republicans will have a clean sweep, though probably not supermajorities. It means they can design fiscal policy how they like, and that will mean:
- Most of the personal tax measures of the 2017 TCJA will be renewed next year. - The federal corporate tax rate won't rise from its current level, but there will probably be tightening up of various international tax provisions in the code - Spending will be cut across the board to avoid the deficit rising into the stratosphere, but the deficit will still rise close to the tropopause
Yes, who would have thought the governing party would pay for people to go and campaign for Harris.
Why not? The Tories and the people who own the Tories fund people to campaign for the GOP. Both sides have done it for years. Farage has been openly criticising "election interference" of Labour people going to campaign for Harris whilst he is in America campaigning for Trump.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
I believe this was the first time a governing party in the UK interfered to the extent of officially PAYING for people to go and campaign for one side in the USA
Quite bewilderingly stupid and destructive. But then, this is Starmer’s Labour. It’s what they do
This election has already made Labour a lame duck government
I think their chance of re-election will be greatly diminished after the economic catastrophe Trump's tariffs are likely to impose on the world.
I sat out PB after Andy's poll. I'm glad I did, scrolling through the overnight posts you were insufferable. Some fair minded commentary from others.
William Hague's piece in yesterday's Times, page 23.
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
Perhaps everyone’s takeaway from this should be to tone down the language somewhat.
In January 1933, Hitler did not immediately become a dictator. When he became chancellor, Germany’s democratic constitution was still in effect. However, Hitler transformed Germany by manipulating the democratic political system. Hitler and other Nazi leaders used existing laws to destroy German democracy and create a dictatorship.
There truly is open denial going on - and its not from us dripping-wet liberals. Its from the right. No no, he isn't fascist. That dictionary definition is wrong, you can't look at what he Says and Does and take that as roof of what he says and does, you can set aside the lived experience of 4-star Marine Corp Generals and their ilk because they are wusses who definitely didn't serve the man or know what they are talking about.
Agreed. The future is quite obviously (and just now quite radically) uncertain.
But given that the uncertainty is whether democracy in USA unravels in favour of fascism, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution myself.
It's interesting that Arizona is currently looking like it will be the closest of the swing states - completely contrary to the pre-election expectation. We really did know less than nothing.
I think this is the ultimate "get woke, go broke" example. The backlash to wokeism has been building up for the last two years as people want companies and politicians to concentrate on the stuff that really matters. Kamala was the woke candidate as @HYUFD pointed out over and over, she's been brushed aside by the same cultural phenomenon that has Hollywood and the gaming industry under siege.
Yep. And a few of our regulars even fell into the Woke takes about that too.
I think it's a terrible take and Kamala is not remotely "woke". What is this supposed "woke"ness she exuded?
The problem is sadly that people do not feel better off than 4 years ago. That the price of essentials costs much more than 4 years ago.
And that despite the fact the surge in inflation had nothing to do with Biden, despite the fact that inflation has come back down, they have blamed the administration and voted for the Opposition as has happened around the globe.
The only reason it even ended up being this close is due to how shit Trump is. Had Kamala been "woke" like you imagine it wouldn't have been this close.
Impressively, I got every one of the four states I bet on wrong.
I got every one of the thirteen states I bet on wrong! Possibly not Nevada and Arizona. Down £2K. That's nothing compared with the heartache for Zelensky
I'm down maybe £400. Given that I normally bet much more election time, but mostly swerved this one, I've got off lightly.
I'm down £800.
Whilst I'm pissed off at how this board debated the election, that's really my fault: I was lazy, complacent and did little research. I haven't played the US markets well for months. On the night itself I could have traded out and cut my losses to about £100 just after midnight, but I didn't because I got greedy and was certain Harris would pip the PV. I wanted sleep more. She didn't and when I woke up again I was heavily underwater.
I'd normally be much more bothered about this but I've just resigned and am going to a new job, so have a level of inner calm about it all, and you can't win every bet.
Comments
Has Trump really won this?
I don’t know if they’re into veal there but they make good FG in upper New York State.
All they see is cheap foreign goods which could be made in America.
The way tariffs result in higher prices is a multi step process and people’s eyes gloss over after step 1
@shadihamid
Democrats spent the final weeks of the campaign browbeating and shaming black and brown voters and telling them basically that they were stupid to even consider voting for Trump. This is what they got in return.
5:06 AM · Nov 6, 2024"
https://x.com/shadihamid/status/1854027469679980583
"Trump is no Reagon — we all need him to lose
Republican Party that Conservatives knew and admired is captured by a dark cult which threatens freedom everywhere"
That means some extra billions for increasing British defence production. Some billions for Ukrainian defence production. And some billions to buy munitions from America for Ukraine. It probably does no harm diplomatically to be the first European country to commit to spending billions on American weapons after Trump decides not to spend money on sending them to Ukraine.
It would also help, in a small way, if Ireland could grow up and ditch neutrality. The "neutral, but not neutral" formulation just doesn't work.
Which allows the theocracy to do anything it likes.
As a student of politics this is truly fascinating!
But USA should be ashamed at electing a convicted felon, serial liar and demonstrated rapist to the most powerful position in the world....
The only saving grace is he will probably be forced to resign for health reasons (take your pick) before too long.
Ireland does fantastically well from a position of well-heeled piety in which the grubby business of shooting people is subcontracted to the nasty Brits at zero cost to its own Treasury. There is no reason to suppose that this will change.
Trump has won.
I reckon it is misogyny that has caused this disaster.
Essentially people have enough trust in Trump that they can't believe he would do something so stupid, even though he says he would do something that stupid. So the thing can't be stupid.
But cheer up. Marvel at our liberal British soft power
I just saw this on one of Seoul’s main shopping streets
Heck, people in the USA have even been calling abortion rights 'woke'.
2. Removing the rights of American citizens to be American citizens. Trump and the GOP have said repeatedly that they will deport citizens for their crime of being the wrong ethnicity
Again, I'm not saying this, Trump is. I'm not doing this, Republicans are. You can say you choose not to believe them, and thats your choice. But they have absolutely said these things over and over and with the actions already taken in some states we know they are serious.
The networks know it’s ***THE*** swing State, and calling PA is calling the whole race for Trump.
They can’t bear to actually say it.
Keeping people alive into their 90s is bloody expensive work.
Although I suspect civil war has been postponed.
Do it again tho and we shall all ignore you forever
😘
A lot of people need to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
They cost me money.
You can't see the hypocrisy?
Haley would have been elected.
The American voters have done a terrible thing. Shame on them.
It's their country, their choice, and that's democracy. But you can and they have democratically done the wrong thing.
2. What exactly has been said about deporting citizens? I’ve heard lots about deporting illegal aliens who commit crime, but not about citizens.
FFS
Quite bewilderingly stupid and destructive. But then, this is Starmer’s Labour. It’s what they do
This election has already made Labour a lame duck government
So far, Rep has gained 3 seats. Dem zero gains.
And Rep leading in various Dem seats - 3 in PA for starters.
It's obvious from President and Senate results that Dem will not be gaining the House.
Trump and the GOP and Musk have absolutely smashed this. And in a few short months they will be able to do literally anything they want.
Do I support him or them or anything they now stand for? No. But this is POLITICS and it is always entertaining. Even when your side gets demolished as mine just has. Because you get what you vote for any America has voted for Gilead.
On current counts they look like they are heading to 219-220 seats. So it's very close. (218 needed to win)
https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/results/illinois/president
"Oh well!! First thoughts…. The UK now needs to do one thing the left/liberals won’t like (establish strong early relationships with the Trump administration) and one thing the right won’t like (scrap all barriers to trade with Europe/increase military co-operation)."
https://x.com/timfarron/status/1854053265941377279
But it's our world. America wants protectionism and tariffs and to ally with Putin? OK - so the rest of the world needs to pull together stronger.
"Heavily white working-class. R+3
Heavily college-educated white. R+4
Heavily white evangelical. R+4
Majority black. R+5
Majority Hispanic. R+13"
https://www.economist.com/interactive/us-2024-election/results/president
- Most of the personal tax measures of the 2017 TCJA will be renewed next year.
- The federal corporate tax rate won't rise from its current level, but there will probably be tightening up of various international tax provisions in the code
- Spending will be cut across the board to avoid the deficit rising into the stratosphere, but the deficit will still rise close to the tropopause
I sat out PB after Andy's poll. I'm glad I did, scrolling through the overnight posts you were insufferable. Some fair minded commentary from others.
But given that the uncertainty is whether democracy in USA unravels in favour of fascism, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution myself.
What does Europe do about it? And does the UK join them defending eastern Europe? Or maintain the special relationship?
We can't do both.
Trump - over 1,000
Harris - 58
(Total 4,000+ counties)
The problem is sadly that people do not feel better off than 4 years ago. That the price of essentials costs much more than 4 years ago.
And that despite the fact the surge in inflation had nothing to do with Biden, despite the fact that inflation has come back down, they have blamed the administration and voted for the Opposition as has happened around the globe.
The only reason it even ended up being this close is due to how shit Trump is. Had Kamala been "woke" like you imagine it wouldn't have been this close.
Whilst I'm pissed off at how this board debated the election, that's really my fault: I was lazy, complacent and did little research. I haven't played the US markets well for months. On the night itself I could have traded out and cut my losses to about £100 just after midnight, but I didn't because I got greedy and was certain Harris would pip the PV. I wanted sleep more. She didn't and when I woke up again I was heavily underwater.
I'd normally be much more bothered about this but I've just resigned and am going to a new job, so have a level of inner calm about it all, and you can't win every bet.