Howdy, Stranger!

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

The future’s bad, the future’s orange – politicalbetting.com

2456

Comments

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,492
    HYUFD said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    I am sure Trump's tariffs will help with that
    Probably won't affect food prices much as most US food is domestically grown. Consumer goods however are a different matter.
  • nico679 said:

    glw said:

    nico679 said:

    The one thing that deeply worries me is this surge of young men becoming Tate followers , viewing the world as downtrodden men who apparently have to take back control from women . There was this undercurrent in the Trump campaign .

    Previously this group didn’t bother voting , now they do ! It’s political testosteronization .

    As I've said repeatedly for many years now, perhaps social media and democracy are incompatible?

    30 years ago with the top-down media world of the time, when crazy ideas like facts and evidence mattered, the Trump candidacy would never have taken off. He would have been eviscerated by the press at the beginning, and most people would have accepted what they read, heard, or saw, that Trump is patently unfit for office.

    Nowadays Trump can bypass such scrutiny and lie his way to office, and not once but twice now.

    Somewhat ironically the only countries that might be safe from such demagoguery are those that are already one-party states or have strict control of the press and social media. Which of course is not really a solution for those of us who like liberal democracy.
    Yes definitely social media has played a huge role in all of this . One things for sure Europe needs to get a grip and realize that we have to look after ourselves . We simply can’t rely on the US , and nor should we , time to take back control !
    We should not rely on "Europe" either.

    We should rely on ourselves, not have a single point of failure. A collection of willing nations spending what we need to and working together voluntarily. Not a single European army that can let us down like a single American one can.
  • Omnium said:

    Omnium said:

    Well done TSE - an excellent header title :)

    It dawned on me last week that next year will be 30 years since my first mobile phone.

    I was nostalgic for Orange, Cellnet, One2One, and Vodafone.
    Odd how these things linger - 'You can be sure of Shell' came to mind the other day.
    Put a Tiger in your tank!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,622

    Ash Sarkar is always useless but she has touched on one key thing for me.

    Harris was seen as continuity Biden. And she never really did much to change this view. People said they can’t afford to eat and she had no answers.

    It’s very similar to what Sunak tried here by going on other issues.

    So no, I don’t think it’s the w word that lost this election. It’s Joe Biden and Harris.

    I am convinced by the idea of their choosing a governor instead.

    imho they should have somehow made it possible for Sherrod Brown to be the candidate.

    If we are doing somehow made it possibles, why not somehow make it possible for everyone to be happy and content?

    There is no "they" who could have made this possible.
    The DNC in this case, is 'they'.

    So the DNC would have to somehow persuade Harris to step down, her surrogates to forget about it being the turn of a female President, and stop all the other Governors and Senators from stepping into the fray too. It just was not remotely achievable.
    Just run a proper set of primaries, acknowledging that Biden's age and health meant that a secons term wasn't going to happen. If Harris won that, fair enough. But at least give the others a chance.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,742

    HYUFD said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    I am sure Trump's tariffs will help with that
    The Democrats can hope for “win by default” like Labour but I’m not convinced they can bet on that.

    I don’t know what a compelling Democratic platform looks like but it starts with I think going far more hard on immigration, cost of living.
    The Democrats have lost the White House. But they have the better track record in recent decades with the presidency. They do well in the House. They do OK in the Senate, given it’s massively disproportional when it comes to smaller states. The Democratic platform has often been the more compelling. It wasn’t this week.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,774
    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,949

    Can PB formulate a Democratic campaign that could have defeated Trump?

    Of course not. The campaign just gone has proven the PB herd just doesn't get what the average American really wants.
    Most PBers thought the election would be close. The election was close. Seems to me that PBers understand the average American fine.

    Most PBers perhaps disagree with the average American, but that’s a different matter.
    Yep. Most wanted Harris to win but a few didn't. Some thought she would win, many didn't. There was no "groupthink" on it. People alleging PB groupthink were just seeking to present as detached and superior.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494

    spudgfsh said:

    I may be being naive here but this is peak Trump.
    1) Age and term limits will prevent him running again
    2) he has the senate (and I'm expecting the house) so will be able to make significant changes.

    but there's the rub. he'll deal with stuff that others will not deal with in ways other won't like. It could get messy for Ukraine when he pulls US support and it could get messy both the US and global economy if he imposes all the Tariffs he's suggested.

    his and the GOP approval has only one way to go in my opinion.

    Agreed, to an extent. A good chunk of voters seem to have fallen for Trump offering simplistic solutions to America's complex problems. Most of them won't work and some will amplify the underlying issues. Those voters will get fed up with him quite quickly I think.

    But there are others who want to rebuild America into some strange pseudo-1920s nostalgia trip, where women have no rights, nobody is trans, the US is king of manufacturing and jobs for life are common. Those I believe will keep faith with Trump, and probably Vance if Trump croaks it before the next election.
    True. but the number in the second category are not enough to win/keep power alone. when those in the first category walk away from the hot mess (if it gets that bad) will take a lot of convincing to go back.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,826
    edited November 6

    Trump's emphatic win gives him an undeniable legitimacy that should avoid much of the psychodrama of his first term driven by people who didn't think he had any right to be president.

    Indeed. He absolutely has an emphatic mandate, the US owns Trump and all his works.

    Though I suspect a couple of years from now there will be a lot of Trump voters who are quite surprised when, having elected a leopard, are quite surprised when it turns round and eats their face..
    I see it more as the leopard eats your face and then shits on what’s left.
  • Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    I am sure Trump's tariffs will help with that
    Probably won't affect food prices much as most US food is domestically grown. Consumer goods however are a different matter.
    Food is fungible so it absolutely does matter. If competition from abroad is restricted then consumer prices for food can go up while still consuming domestic food.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,266

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,220
    edited November 6

    nico679 said:

    glw said:

    nico679 said:

    The one thing that deeply worries me is this surge of young men becoming Tate followers , viewing the world as downtrodden men who apparently have to take back control from women . There was this undercurrent in the Trump campaign .

    Previously this group didn’t bother voting , now they do ! It’s political testosteronization .

    As I've said repeatedly for many years now, perhaps social media and democracy are incompatible?

    30 years ago with the top-down media world of the time, when crazy ideas like facts and evidence mattered, the Trump candidacy would never have taken off. He would have been eviscerated by the press at the beginning, and most people would have accepted what they read, heard, or saw, that Trump is patently unfit for office.

    Nowadays Trump can bypass such scrutiny and lie his way to office, and not once but twice now.

    Somewhat ironically the only countries that might be safe from such demagoguery are those that are already one-party states or have strict control of the press and social media. Which of course is not really a solution for those of us who like liberal democracy.
    Yes definitely social media has played a huge role in all of this . One things for sure Europe needs to get a grip and realize that we have to look after ourselves . We simply can’t rely on the US , and nor should we , time to take back control !
    We should not rely on "Europe" either.

    We should rely on ourselves, not have a single point of failure. A collection of willing nations spending what we need to and working together voluntarily. Not a single European army that can let us down like a single American one can.
    A European army yes is a non-starter but as you said a voluntary arrangement. I think that comment by the French politician was quite brilliant and summed things up when he talked of European defence and it not being at the whim of a bunch of voters in Wisconsin every 4 years .
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,865

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    not forgetting rape and sexual assault?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,645

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    No-one cared about Boris swanning off to meet KGB connections to be honest. Indeed I remember being accused of being racist for mentioning it.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,266

    It's pointless us getting upset by it and bleating and crying that it's unfair, heartbreaking and the end of the world. Enough Americans seemingly want what Trump is offering and everyone else just has to suck it up.

    It’s not unfair.

    He won fair and square. It’s what America wants.

    Personally I think he is an utterly appalling person and totally unfit but America thinks differently. They’ve given him a mandate to govern as he wants.

    For their sake, I hope he is successful.
    I don't often agree with you on much, but on this i wholeheartedly agree.

    I think the election of Trump is an unmitigated disaster, and shame on Americans for voting for him.

    It is in my eyes a disaster for Ukrainians, Americans and the world, in that order.

    However for everyone's sakes, I hope I'm wrong. Wrong about what a disaster he'll be, not wrong that he's unfit to be anywhere near elected office, 6 January 2021 proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
    That's the bit which I (and I suspect the ex-Tory still-Wet bit of the spectrum) struggles with.

    I can see the appeal of the platform. Don't agree with it, think it will be a disaster if tried, think it's a reaction against ghosts, but can see the appeal. In the same way that desperate strugglers have always flocked to the strongman promising easy solutions... just with a fraction of the actual justification. Don't like it, but can acknowledge it.

    But.

    The vessel chosen to embody this is one Donald J. Trump. And he ought to be excluded from the game because of the events of four years ago. Simple as. There were plenty of other people offering something that (to me) seems like a crazy-nasty agenda, but without the democratic compromise. They all fell by the wayside during the primary process. And when push came to shove, the American right decided that they'd rather compromise on their committment to democracy than their commitment to right-wingness.

    To be fair, the Conservatives didn't do that. Once Johnson's continued lying became intolerable, they acted. But the historical record of the moderate right around the world isn't good here. And the list of times and places where it has worked well seems awfully short.
    f this were a John Grisham novel, Trump wouldn't make it to January 20.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,622

    It's pointless us getting upset by it and bleating and crying that it's unfair, heartbreaking and the end of the world. Enough Americans seemingly want what Trump is offering and everyone else just has to suck it up.

    It’s not unfair.

    He won fair and square. It’s what America wants.

    Personally I think he is an utterly appalling person and totally unfit but America thinks differently. They’ve given him a mandate to govern as he wants.

    For their sake, I hope he is successful.
    I don't often agree with you on much, but on this i wholeheartedly agree.

    I think the election of Trump is an unmitigated disaster, and shame on Americans for voting for him.

    It is in my eyes a disaster for Ukrainians, Americans and the world, in that order.

    However for everyone's sakes, I hope I'm wrong. Wrong about what a disaster he'll be, not wrong that he's unfit to be anywhere near elected office, 6 January 2021 proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
    That's the bit which I (and I suspect the ex-Tory still-Wet bit of the spectrum) struggles with.

    I can see the appeal of the platform. Don't agree with it, think it will be a disaster if tried, think it's a reaction against ghosts, but can see the appeal. In the same way that desperate strugglers have always flocked to the strongman promising easy solutions... just with a fraction of the actual justification. Don't like it, but can acknowledge it.

    But.

    The vessel chosen to embody this is one Donald J. Trump. And he ought to be excluded from the game because of the events of four years ago. Simple as. There were plenty of other people offering something that (to me) seems like a crazy-nasty agenda, but without the democratic compromise. They all fell by the wayside during the primary process. And when push came to shove, the American right decided that they'd rather compromise on their committment to democracy than their commitment to right-wingness.

    To be fair, the Conservatives didn't do that. Once Johnson's continued lying became intolerable, they acted. But the historical record of the moderate right around the world isn't good here. And the list of times and places where it has worked well seems awfully short.
    Part of Trump's appeal to his base was how much he riled their opponents. The how-far-beyond-the-pale was part of the attraction - "I may not, objectively, like this guy - but the people I hate hate him more than anyone."
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6
    Andy_JS said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Why have food prices gone up so much more in the US than the UK?
    Minimum wage in some states has nearly doubled in 4 years. Even if state minimum wage didn't go up significantly, post covid, companies struggled to hire so had to up wages a get people, plus high inflation was driving up cost of everything. Many businesses in food sector ran on very fine margins predicated on very cheap labour and it basically broke the model that you could still sell something for a few $, hence why McDonalds prices went mental.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,735
    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
  • Assuming it does go horribly wrong for the voters who put Trump in, it might go as badly for them next time as it did the Tories this time.

    I still hope frankly it doesn’t and Trump somehow delivers for them.

    But to be honest, I’m sceptical these people will ever hold Trump responsible even if it does all go wrong. He seems completely and utterly immune.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,266

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    No-one cared about Boris swanning off to meet KGB connections to be honest. Indeed I remember being accused of being racist for mentioning it.
    Boris will be Boris. Isn't he planning a political ressurection too?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,645
    Cookie said:

    Ash Sarkar is always useless but she has touched on one key thing for me.

    Harris was seen as continuity Biden. And she never really did much to change this view. People said they can’t afford to eat and she had no answers.

    It’s very similar to what Sunak tried here by going on other issues.

    So no, I don’t think it’s the w word that lost this election. It’s Joe Biden and Harris.

    I am convinced by the idea of their choosing a governor instead.

    imho they should have somehow made it possible for Sherrod Brown to be the candidate.

    If we are doing somehow made it possibles, why not somehow make it possible for everyone to be happy and content?

    There is no "they" who could have made this possible.
    The DNC in this case, is 'they'.

    So the DNC would have to somehow persuade Harris to step down, her surrogates to forget about it being the turn of a female President, and stop all the other Governors and Senators from stepping into the fray too. It just was not remotely achievable.
    Just run a proper set of primaries, acknowledging that Biden's age and health meant that a secons term wasn't going to happen. If Harris won that, fair enough. But at least give the others a chance.
    And then the criticism would have been that they made their divisions public and the backers of the losing candidates would have been unmotivated.

    Given the economy I think a fair result for such an election is probably 55-45 thru 60-40 to the challengers. Harris did ok and Trump did badly imo. The fundamentals won.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,077

    Assuming it does go horribly wrong for the voters who put Trump in, it might go as badly for them next time as it did the Tories this time.

    I still hope frankly it doesn’t and Trump somehow delivers for them.

    But to be honest, I’m sceptical these people will ever hold Trump responsible even if it does all go wrong. He seems completely and utterly immune.

    Unfortunately, I think you're right.

    A sufficient number of people wanted Trump, and I'm not sure anything was going to get in their way.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,645

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    No-one cared about Boris swanning off to meet KGB connections to be honest. Indeed I remember being accused of being racist for mentioning it.
    Boris will be Boris. Isn't he planning a political ressurection too?
    If he wasn't the Trump story will be inspiration. But yes he has been as far as I can tell.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,292
    There are still around 10 million votes to count just in California, Oregon and Washington, which will cause the popular vote narrow significantly.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6
    The Rest is Politics mob still stuck on the but but but Orange man bad, Jan 6th, how could the Americans be so stupid. Dominic Sandbrook is the only one attempting to offer any thought or insight about why it might be that Harris lost.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,630

    Assuming it does go horribly wrong for the voters who put Trump in, it might go as badly for them next time as it did the Tories this time.

    I still hope frankly it doesn’t and Trump somehow delivers for them.

    But to be honest, I’m sceptical these people will ever hold Trump responsible even if it does all go wrong. He seems completely and utterly immune.

    But the GOP now has four years to rig the next election with total control all of all three branches of government. They are also very good at this kind of thing.

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,716

    nico679 said:

    glw said:

    nico679 said:

    The one thing that deeply worries me is this surge of young men becoming Tate followers , viewing the world as downtrodden men who apparently have to take back control from women . There was this undercurrent in the Trump campaign .

    Previously this group didn’t bother voting , now they do ! It’s political testosteronization .

    As I've said repeatedly for many years now, perhaps social media and democracy are incompatible?

    30 years ago with the top-down media world of the time, when crazy ideas like facts and evidence mattered, the Trump candidacy would never have taken off. He would have been eviscerated by the press at the beginning, and most people would have accepted what they read, heard, or saw, that Trump is patently unfit for office.

    Nowadays Trump can bypass such scrutiny and lie his way to office, and not once but twice now.

    Somewhat ironically the only countries that might be safe from such demagoguery are those that are already one-party states or have strict control of the press and social media. Which of course is not really a solution for those of us who like liberal democracy.
    Yes definitely social media has played a huge role in all of this . One things for sure Europe needs to get a grip and realize that we have to look after ourselves . We simply can’t rely on the US , and nor should we , time to take back control !
    We should not rely on "Europe" either.

    We should rely on ourselves, not have a single point of failure. A collection of willing nations spending what we need to and working together voluntarily. Not a single European army that can let us down like a single American one can.
    I'm reading this standing in a long immigration line in Frankfurt.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,774

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    No-one cared about Boris swanning off to meet KGB connections to be honest. Indeed I remember being accused of being racist for mentioning it.
    Boris will be Boris. Isn't he planning a political ressurection too?
    From today onwards I think we should refer to Trump as “America Boris”.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,622

    Cookie said:

    Ash Sarkar is always useless but she has touched on one key thing for me.

    Harris was seen as continuity Biden. And she never really did much to change this view. People said they can’t afford to eat and she had no answers.

    It’s very similar to what Sunak tried here by going on other issues.

    So no, I don’t think it’s the w word that lost this election. It’s Joe Biden and Harris.

    I am convinced by the idea of their choosing a governor instead.

    imho they should have somehow made it possible for Sherrod Brown to be the candidate.

    If we are doing somehow made it possibles, why not somehow make it possible for everyone to be happy and content?

    There is no "they" who could have made this possible.
    The DNC in this case, is 'they'.

    So the DNC would have to somehow persuade Harris to step down, her surrogates to forget about it being the turn of a female President, and stop all the other Governors and Senators from stepping into the fray too. It just was not remotely achievable.
    Just run a proper set of primaries, acknowledging that Biden's age and health meant that a secons term wasn't going to happen. If Harris won that, fair enough. But at least give the others a chance.
    And then the criticism would have been that they made their divisions public and the backers of the losing candidates would have been unmotivated.

    Given the economy I think a fair result for such an election is probably 55-45 thru 60-40 to the challengers. Harris did ok and Trump did badly imo. The fundamentals won.
    But given we got Trump anyway and it was always likely that we would, wasn't it worth a shot?
    In retrospect clearly it was.
    Some of us were saying at the time that Biden wasn't up to it and Harris wasn't a sufficiently attractive candidate to win. That was obvious from 5000 miles away. A shrug and a hope-for-the-best wasn't really a good enough response.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,077

    It's pointless us getting upset by it and bleating and crying that it's unfair, heartbreaking and the end of the world. Enough Americans seemingly want what Trump is offering and everyone else just has to suck it up.

    It’s not unfair.

    He won fair and square. It’s what America wants.

    Personally I think he is an utterly appalling person and totally unfit but America thinks differently. They’ve given him a mandate to govern as he wants.

    For their sake, I hope he is successful.
    I don't often agree with you on much, but on this i wholeheartedly agree.

    I think the election of Trump is an unmitigated disaster, and shame on Americans for voting for him.

    It is in my eyes a disaster for Ukrainians, Americans and the world, in that order.

    However for everyone's sakes, I hope I'm wrong. Wrong about what a disaster he'll be, not wrong that he's unfit to be anywhere near elected office, 6 January 2021 proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
    That's the bit which I (and I suspect the ex-Tory still-Wet bit of the spectrum) struggles with.

    I can see the appeal of the platform. Don't agree with it, think it will be a disaster if tried, think it's a reaction against ghosts, but can see the appeal. In the same way that desperate strugglers have always flocked to the strongman promising easy solutions... just with a fraction of the actual justification. Don't like it, but can acknowledge it.

    But.

    The vessel chosen to embody this is one Donald J. Trump. And he ought to be excluded from the game because of the events of four years ago. Simple as. There were plenty of other people offering something that (to me) seems like a crazy-nasty agenda, but without the democratic compromise. They all fell by the wayside during the primary process. And when push came to shove, the American right decided that they'd rather compromise on their committment to democracy than their commitment to right-wingness.

    To be fair, the Conservatives didn't do that. Once Johnson's continued lying became intolerable, they acted. But the historical record of the moderate right around the world isn't good here. And the list of times and places where it has worked well seems awfully short.
    f this were a John Grisham novel, Trump wouldn't make it to January 20.
    He might not, without anything sinister happening. He's already giving off strong "General Franco is still alive" vibes.

    But yes. He's done what he was needed for- which was to win the election. It might be polite to leave him in the Oval Office, but how much is he actually going to do, and how much is he going to leave to even worse people?
  • Assuming it does go horribly wrong for the voters who put Trump in, it might go as badly for them next time as it did the Tories this time.

    I still hope frankly it doesn’t and Trump somehow delivers for them.

    But to be honest, I’m sceptical these people will ever hold Trump responsible even if it does all go wrong. He seems completely and utterly immune.

    As much as I utterly hate the expression, it does seem that the 2020 election could be a "good election to lose".

    Following Covid we were always going to get a recovery. That recovery, combined with the war in Ukraine, meant rampant inflation. And governments across the democratic world have paid the price for that, whether in the USA or UK.

    Voters in America no more credited the administration for getting inflation back down than voters here credited Sunak for it.

    In the next few years I'm optimistic about the economic outlook of the globe (so long as we don't get a tariff war) but there won't be that huge inflation spike. The Democrats took the blame for that, had Trump won reelection four years ago, then the Democrats would have won a massive victory last night.
  • viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6

    This is why I get annoyed at lefties like Owen Jones, they see the skin colour/ethnicity and think we have to vote the way they think we should.

    Yessir master.

    If only Owen Jones could have lectured more working-class minorities, this whole thing would have gone differently



    https://x.com/jessesingal/status/1854150372119490635

    A lot of US media is unfortunately banging along similar lines. Black men hate illegal immigrants, latinos hate women leaders, black men hate trans ideology....therefore they vote Trump in higher numbers. Its the sort of othering they call Trump out for doing.

    Not, people on the mid to lower end feel much worse off than 4 years ago....there are people in all demographics including white people without college degrees, which feel this way, thus willing to give Trump another go.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,266
    edited November 6

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    not forgetting rape and sexual assault?
    Attempting to overthrow the elected Government and the 250 year old Constitutionin in a bloody and seditious coup d'etat would be the clincher for me.

    Edit: And inciting the attempted lynching of the Vice President.

  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,622

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Almost all of our large cities which got cathedrals either had small parish churches retrofitted as cathedrals (Manchester) or new cathedrals in edge locations (Liverpool).

    ISTR there was a proposal for an absolutely massive cathedral in Manchester's Piccadilly Gardens. That would have fit the bill. Instead we got City Tower and the fucking Mercure Hotel.
  • Cookie said:

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Almost all of our large cities which got cathedrals either had small parish churches retrofitted as cathedrals (Manchester) or new cathedrals in edge locations (Liverpool).

    ISTR there was a proposal for an absolutely massive cathedral in Manchester's Piccadilly Gardens. That would have fit the bill. Instead we got City Tower and the fucking Mercure Hotel.
    Both sound more useful.
  • This is why I get annoyed at lefties like Owen Jones, they see the skin colour/ethnicity and think we have to vote the way they think we should.

    Yessir master.

    If only Owen Jones could have lectured more working-class minorities, this whole thing would have gone differently



    https://x.com/jessesingal/status/1854150372119490635

    A lot of US media is unfortunately like that. Black men hate illegal immigrants, latinos hate women leaders, black men hate trans ideology....therefore they vote Trump in higher numbers.
    I've said on here they'd be shocked if they spoke to my mother about illegal immigration, she says her generation/her parents' generation came over to the UK because they were invited to do so and don't even get her started about the Roma.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,645
    edited November 6
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Ash Sarkar is always useless but she has touched on one key thing for me.

    Harris was seen as continuity Biden. And she never really did much to change this view. People said they can’t afford to eat and she had no answers.

    It’s very similar to what Sunak tried here by going on other issues.

    So no, I don’t think it’s the w word that lost this election. It’s Joe Biden and Harris.

    I am convinced by the idea of their choosing a governor instead.

    imho they should have somehow made it possible for Sherrod Brown to be the candidate.

    If we are doing somehow made it possibles, why not somehow make it possible for everyone to be happy and content?

    There is no "they" who could have made this possible.
    The DNC in this case, is 'they'.

    So the DNC would have to somehow persuade Harris to step down, her surrogates to forget about it being the turn of a female President, and stop all the other Governors and Senators from stepping into the fray too. It just was not remotely achievable.
    Just run a proper set of primaries, acknowledging that Biden's age and health meant that a secons term wasn't going to happen. If Harris won that, fair enough. But at least give the others a chance.
    And then the criticism would have been that they made their divisions public and the backers of the losing candidates would have been unmotivated.

    Given the economy I think a fair result for such an election is probably 55-45 thru 60-40 to the challengers. Harris did ok and Trump did badly imo. The fundamentals won.
    But given we got Trump anyway and it was always likely that we would, wasn't it worth a shot?
    In retrospect clearly it was.
    Some of us were saying at the time that Biden wasn't up to it and Harris wasn't a sufficiently attractive candidate to win. That was obvious from 5000 miles away. A shrug and a hope-for-the-best wasn't really a good enough response.
    Your obvious just needed a 1.5% swing a few months later and it would have gone the other way and the consensus would be what a great candidate Harris is.

    She is neither great nor terrible, its small margins and this election was mostly driven by fundamentals not personalities.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    England in the cricket getting smashed like Harris in the swing states..
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,824

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,622

    Cookie said:

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Almost all of our large cities which got cathedrals either had small parish churches retrofitted as cathedrals (Manchester) or new cathedrals in edge locations (Liverpool).

    ISTR there was a proposal for an absolutely massive cathedral in Manchester's Piccadilly Gardens. That would have fit the bill. Instead we got City Tower and the fucking Mercure Hotel.
    Both sound more useful.
    I have been inside both. Yet imagine a cathedral like Liverpool's on Picc Gardens! Even if you believe religion to be useless, architectural beauty would do the city more good than those two.
  • “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.
  • Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Almost all of our large cities which got cathedrals either had small parish churches retrofitted as cathedrals (Manchester) or new cathedrals in edge locations (Liverpool).

    ISTR there was a proposal for an absolutely massive cathedral in Manchester's Piccadilly Gardens. That would have fit the bill. Instead we got City Tower and the fucking Mercure Hotel.
    Both sound more useful.
    I have been inside both. Yet imagine a cathedral like Liverpool's on Picc Gardens! Even if you believe religion to be useless, architectural beauty would do the city more good than those two.
    Why?

    Yes I consider it a useless relic. An entertaining relic it it's already there but there's no point whatsoever creating new relics where they're not needed.

    Completely artificial and pointless.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    Given the course plotted, we all better hope Trump was talking a lot of hot air during the election. If he goes for things like tariffs on everything, things could get real sticky.
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
    Command economies collapse in on themselves, all you can hope is that you don’t end up with a mass starvation event or genocide.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,266

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    Don't believe all you read in the Daily Mail.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,742

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    If there is another period of high inflation, make sure you get your narrative sorted quickly as to who to blame. Identifying someone else you can blame seems to be a winning strategy with voters.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,679
    On the collapse of the England cricket team German government, nothing on BBC but:

    BERLIN, Nov 6 (Reuters) - German Chancellor Olaf Scholz sacked his Finance Minister Christian Lindner on Wednesday after weeks of wrangling over the economic direction of the government, sources told Reuters.
    Newspaper Bild had earlier reported that Lindner had recommended early elections as a solution to the budget impasse, a proposal Scholz had rejected.
    It was unclear if Lindner's dismissal would lead also to the departure of the Free Democrats (FDP) from the coalition.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,774
    edited November 6
    Cookie said:

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Almost all of our large cities which got cathedrals either had small parish churches retrofitted as cathedrals (Manchester) or new cathedrals in edge locations (Liverpool).

    ISTR there was a proposal for an absolutely massive cathedral in Manchester's Piccadilly Gardens. That would have fit the bill. Instead we got City Tower and the fucking Mercure Hotel.
    Manchester has enough large public spaces that it could easily accommodate a cathedral. Leeds not so much - to me it feels like a slightly outsized market town.

    When you reflect on the same thing overseas it’s actually surprising how few large cities outside Italy have cathedral or ecclesiastical clusters at their heart. Istanbul, Prague, Cologne, Reims, Lausanne, Seville (but even those latter few are second tier). Barcelona has a famous cathedral but it’s in the suburbs, and a very infamous central cathedral that’s not very prominent. Notre Dame is a little marginal, like St Paul’s.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6
    How have England become so crap at 50 over cricket. Can't they just visualise its really just a test match with a different coloured ball.....as they pretty much always smash 300+ off 50-60 overs anyway.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,420
    Andy_JS said:

    I'd like to know what Channel 4 was thinking when they decided to have Stormy Daniels, George Santos and Boris Johnson on their election night coverage.

    You don’t often see Channel 4 brutalised in the Guardian so enjoy this rare one.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/nov/06/boris-johnson-j-lo-weird-ways-uk-tv-covered-us-election
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
    You have that backwards.

    Democratic governments don't last forever but liberal democracies last longer and more successfully than command authoritarian states do.

    Yes the Opposition may win sometimes. Yes sometimes it's Buggins Turn and we need to lose. But that's OK.

    Winning isn't everything. Having a liberal, democratic, healthy nation is more important than whether your party wins or loses one election when there will be another in 3, 4 or 5 years time.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,983

    nico679 said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    We’ve all had inflation but I’m sure that the Brits wouldn’t have voted for a Trump like character . The Dems were poor at messaging and not helped by a US media who embarked on gold medal levels of sane washing .

    Maybe I am wrong but I do think that any candidate openly mocking the disabled would not be deemed fit for elected office by British voters.

    Storing classified national secrets in the (accessible to friends, relatives, and KGB handlers) bathroom of one's private residence 500 miles from where they should be securely stored might raise an eyebrow too.
    not forgetting rape and sexual assault?
    Attempting to overthrow the elected Government and the 250 year old Constitutionin in a bloody and seditious coup d'etat would be the clincher for me.

    Edit: And inciting the attempted lynching of the Vice President.

    I bet Pence voted for him though 😂
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6
    boulay said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd like to know what Channel 4 was thinking when they decided to have Stormy Daniels, George Santos and Boris Johnson on their election night coverage.

    You don’t often see Channel 4 brutalised in the Guardian so enjoy this rare one.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/nov/06/boris-johnson-j-lo-weird-ways-uk-tv-covered-us-election
    All the UK coverage was crap...all the US coverage was crap...the only thing worth watching with John King segments between continuously refreshing PB and the NYT needle of doom.....
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,774
    geoffw said:

    On the collapse of the England cricket team German government, nothing on BBC but:

    BERLIN, Nov 6 (Reuters) - German Chancellor Olaf Scholz sacked his Finance Minister Christian Lindner on Wednesday after weeks of wrangling over the economic direction of the government, sources told Reuters.
    Newspaper Bild had earlier reported that Lindner had recommended early elections as a solution to the budget impasse, a proposal Scholz had rejected.
    It was unclear if Lindner's dismissal would lead also to the departure of the Free Democrats (FDP) from the coalition.

    The FDP are polling so low they could conceivably end up with no representation if there’s an election, so it’s not really in their interests to depart.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,727
    I don't think Badenoch erred. Some far as I can tell she didn't praise Trump. Indeed does anyone have any record of her praising Trump previously? Most Brits have a low regard for Trump whilst understanding we'll have to work with him.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,266

    It's pointless us getting upset by it and bleating and crying that it's unfair, heartbreaking and the end of the world. Enough Americans seemingly want what Trump is offering and everyone else just has to suck it up.

    It’s not unfair.

    He won fair and square. It’s what America wants.

    Personally I think he is an utterly appalling person and totally unfit but America thinks differently. They’ve given him a mandate to govern as he wants.

    For their sake, I hope he is successful.
    I don't often agree with you on much, but on this i wholeheartedly agree.

    I think the election of Trump is an unmitigated disaster, and shame on Americans for voting for him.

    It is in my eyes a disaster for Ukrainians, Americans and the world, in that order.

    However for everyone's sakes, I hope I'm wrong. Wrong about what a disaster he'll be, not wrong that he's unfit to be anywhere near elected office, 6 January 2021 proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
    That's the bit which I (and I suspect the ex-Tory still-Wet bit of the spectrum) struggles with.

    I can see the appeal of the platform. Don't agree with it, think it will be a disaster if tried, think it's a reaction against ghosts, but can see the appeal. In the same way that desperate strugglers have always flocked to the strongman promising easy solutions... just with a fraction of the actual justification. Don't like it, but can acknowledge it.

    But.

    The vessel chosen to embody this is one Donald J. Trump. And he ought to be excluded from the game because of the events of four years ago. Simple as. There were plenty of other people offering something that (to me) seems like a crazy-nasty agenda, but without the democratic compromise. They all fell by the wayside during the primary process. And when push came to shove, the American right decided that they'd rather compromise on their committment to democracy than their commitment to right-wingness.

    To be fair, the Conservatives didn't do that. Once Johnson's continued lying became intolerable, they acted. But the historical record of the moderate right around the world isn't good here. And the list of times and places where it has worked well seems awfully short.
    f this were a John Grisham novel, Trump wouldn't make it to January 20.
    He might not, without anything sinister happening. He's already giving off strong "General Franco is still alive" vibes.

    But yes. He's done what he was needed for- which was to win the election. It might be polite to leave him in the Oval Office, but how much is he actually going to do, and how much is he going to leave to even worse people?
    If I was Vance I'd want the gig PDQ.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,727

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    If there is another period of high inflation, make sure you get your narrative sorted quickly as to who to blame. Identifying someone else you can blame seems to be a winning strategy with voters.
    A coronavirus perhaps?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,824

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
    Command economies collapse in on themselves, all you can hope is that you don’t end up with a mass starvation event or genocide.
    I know. But they collapse in on themselves eventually. The Soviet Union lasted in one form or another for nearly 70 years. The NHS has lasted for nearly 80 years. You can designate basic foodstuffs as strategic goods and ensure that enough is purchased for people. We did that for quite a while during the corporatist era, with things like the milk marketing board. Not fancy stuff, but basics like milk, coffee, meat, eggs, etc. The Biden administration didn't do this and is now a one-term government with a senile head.

  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,612

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    If there is another period of high inflation, make sure you get your narrative sorted quickly as to who to blame. Identifying someone else you can blame seems to be a winning strategy with voters.
    A coronavirus perhaps?
    An mpox on all our houses?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,607

    Apparently, the German government has just collapsed.

    With Steiner's attack, that will be all right.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,701

    boulay said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd like to know what Channel 4 was thinking when they decided to have Stormy Daniels, George Santos and Boris Johnson on their election night coverage.

    You don’t often see Channel 4 brutalised in the Guardian so enjoy this rare one.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/nov/06/boris-johnson-j-lo-weird-ways-uk-tv-covered-us-election
    All the UK coverage was crap...all the US coverage was crap...the only thing worth watching with John King segments between continuously refreshing PB and the NYT needle of doom.....
    The NYT needle and the ability to dig around and see their state forecasts etc was really rather good I thought.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,558
    I think Kemi did fine, she didn't praise Trump, at least not in any video I've seen. What she did was attack the government for acting like toddlers on Twitter and insulting someone who is going to be a very important partner for the UK over the next 4 years. I think people can see the point she was making, we need to work with Trump like it or not and Lammy going off on one about him on Twitter puts the government on the back foot. For literally no gain. This is Kemi telling the PM to get his MPs in line on Trump or she'll make easy hay.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,742

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    If there is another period of high inflation, make sure you get your narrative sorted quickly as to who to blame. Identifying someone else you can blame seems to be a winning strategy with voters.
    A coronavirus perhaps?
    Too tiny. Doesn’t have a face.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,558

    Can PB formulate a Democratic campaign that could have defeated Trump?

    I've just written up ~ 1100 words and sent to @rcs1000, hope it's good enough to get published, though it doesn't propose anything specific...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,983
    People are starting to question the turnout even though there's millions of votes still to count (On the west coast mainly)
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,796

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Cathedrals were mainly built before in industrial revolution . The NIMBYS at the time would have wanted all those "new" citiies built well away from them hence the most historic cathedrals are well away from major population centres
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    Omnium said:

    boulay said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd like to know what Channel 4 was thinking when they decided to have Stormy Daniels, George Santos and Boris Johnson on their election night coverage.

    You don’t often see Channel 4 brutalised in the Guardian so enjoy this rare one.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/nov/06/boris-johnson-j-lo-weird-ways-uk-tv-covered-us-election
    All the UK coverage was crap...all the US coverage was crap...the only thing worth watching with John King segments between continuously refreshing PB and the NYT needle of doom.....
    The NYT needle and the ability to dig around and see their state forecasts etc was really rather good I thought.
    Yes that was a big plus, as was John King ability to pick out the crucial counties. Other than that too much noise and not enough signal from both MSM and the online political outlets.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,710
    Amazing to me that some people thought Harris was a good candidate who ran a strong campaign. She was patently about the most moronic, least well equipped candidate ever to be nominated, who ran a frankly absurd campaign and had some quite alarming economic policy positions.

    She had the good fortune of facing a late career Donald Trump, which is the only reason it was even slightly close, because he’s the only other candidate ever to run her close for inaptitude for high office.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,558
    Andy_JS said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Why have food prices gone up so much more in the US than the UK?
    It's about the same.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,134
    Pulpstar said:

    People are starting to question the turnout even though there's millions of votes still to count (On the west coast mainly)

    In the sense of wondering whether their vote was binned instead of counted?

    It would be tragic if Democrats followed Trump's lead and spent four years denying their election defeat.
  • viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
    Command economies collapse in on themselves, all you can hope is that you don’t end up with a mass starvation event or genocide.
    I know. But they collapse in on themselves eventually. The Soviet Union lasted in one form or another for nearly 70 years. The NHS has lasted for nearly 80 years. You can designate basic foodstuffs as strategic goods and ensure that enough is purchased for people. We did that for quite a while during the corporatist era, with things like the milk marketing board. Not fancy stuff, but basics like milk, coffee, meat, eggs, etc. The Biden administration didn't do this and is now a one-term government with a senile head.

    Leading a liberal democracy for one term is better than leading an authoritarian dictatorship for five.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,824

    Omnium said:

    boulay said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd like to know what Channel 4 was thinking when they decided to have Stormy Daniels, George Santos and Boris Johnson on their election night coverage.

    You don’t often see Channel 4 brutalised in the Guardian so enjoy this rare one.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/nov/06/boris-johnson-j-lo-weird-ways-uk-tv-covered-us-election
    All the UK coverage was crap...all the US coverage was crap...the only thing worth watching with John King segments between continuously refreshing PB and the NYT needle of doom.....
    The NYT needle and the ability to dig around and see their state forecasts etc was really rather good I thought.
    Yes that was a big plus, as was John King ability to pick out the crucial counties. Other than that too much noise and not enough signal from both MSM and the online political outlets.
    What I desperately wanted was a table (not a map or a choropleth) showing the votes in each state at time t. What I got were maps where the details were gotten when you hovered over them. I couldn't pull off the data fast enough.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,824
    MaxPB said:

    Can PB formulate a Democratic campaign that could have defeated Trump?

    I've just written up ~ 1100 words and sent to @rcs1000, hope it's good enough to get published, though it doesn't propose anything specific...
    Spoilers?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,134

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

    Warning signs for Keir Starmer. If I were Badenoch I’d be quietly confident now.

    If there is another period of high inflation, make sure you get your narrative sorted quickly as to who to blame. Identifying someone else you can blame seems to be a winning strategy with voters.
    You'd think Putin would have been an easy one, but it didn't work that way for anyone.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,501

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Cathedrals were mainly built before in industrial revolution . The NIMBYS at the time would have wanted all those "new" citiies built well away from them hence the most historic cathedrals are well away from major population centres
    Birmingham Cathedral is central, though. It's just that it's too small.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6
    moonshine said:

    Amazing to me that some people thought Harris was a good candidate who ran a strong campaign. She was patently about the most moronic, least well equipped candidate ever to be nominated, who ran a frankly absurd campaign and had some quite alarming economic policy positions.

    She had the good fortune of facing a late career Donald Trump, which is the only reason it was even slightly close, because he’s the only other candidate ever to run her close for inaptitude for high office.

    Her unwillingness to do interviews reminded me a bit of the Maybot. Where as Trump, Vance and Musk were on loads of podcasts. They cycled through all of those as a team. I am sure it was a concrete part of the strategy, screw the MSM, go pitch directly to people through all these interview shows, particularly young male bros.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,679
    I'll say this for the Harisses - they don't give up easily.
    Just as Kamala of that ilk gets knocked down up pops Simon to offer another general election later this month*



    * in Ireland, natch
  • geoffw said:

    I'll say this for the Harisses - they don't give up easily.
    Just as Kamala of that ilk gets knocked down up pops Simon to offer another general election later this month*



    * in Ireland, natch

    And Germany ?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,627
    edited November 6
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Why have food prices gone up so much more in the US than the UK?
    It's about the same.
    I don't think is true for fast food / low end restaurants. US has gone from very cheap to more than here now, especially with the 20% "tip". And US culture is normal that you get several of your meals a day at these places because you could get a meal for a few $ and portions very large.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,679
    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think "The Ukraine" is deprecated nowadays (and is singular)

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,077
    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    In Leeds tonight. Walking around the city centre, and reflecting on my earlier stop in Manchester, I realised that there’s not a single large city in Britain that has a cathedral at its heart.

    London’s focal point is the river. So are Liverpool’s and Newcastle’s. Manchester and Birmingham cluster around a bunch of civic squares and buildings. Leeds and Glasgow centre on a shopping district. Edinburgh either on a railway station or a castle, depending on your perspective. Bournemouth and Brighton on a beach. Bristol and Cardiff and Hull on some docks. Sheffield on nothing much at all.

    Only the second tier of cities - large towns really - have centrepiece cathedrals or churches.

    Good point. Although St Paul's does draw the eye.
    Cathedrals were mainly built before in industrial revolution . The NIMBYS at the time would have wanted all those "new" citiies built well away from them hence the most historic cathedrals are well away from major population centres
    Birmingham Cathedral is central, though. It's just that it's too small.
    Upgraded parish church, isn't it? Same as Portsmouth Cathedral, which is lovely, but still hopelessly small, even for a dinky diocese.

    More generally, we do seem to have lost the talent of giving places a proper heart. A building we can say "that's the centre of this place". It used to be cathedrals, then it became the civic squares or railway stations of the Victorian era. Now, it's... what, exactly? Nowt wrong with shopping centres, but there's not much pride or premanence to them.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,558
    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think you're overdoing the exports angle, tariffs would undoubtedly hurt us but I'm not sure it will be as bad as forecast, the vast majority of our exports to the US are intangible services which aren't subject to tariffs or quotas. If anything the UK will be one of the few countries to maintain very strong economic ties to the US because of the nature of our interaction with the US economy. We export services to them and they export services to us, the large exports we do have to the US is defence which is highly unlikely to come under any tariff regime due to national security concerns and the DoD not wanting to pay more money for existing contracts that have already been signed. The other big one is pharmaceutical products which is an area where Trump is trying to reduce prices so again, tariffs here seem unlikely. I'd be surprised if more than 10% of our export value actually gets pushed into tariffable categories.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,716
    geoffw said:

    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think "The Ukraine" is deprecated nowadays (and is singular)

    Sadly, come January, it will be academic.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,679

    geoffw said:

    I'll say this for the Harisses - they don't give up easily.
    Just as Kamala of that ilk gets knocked down up pops Simon to offer another general election later this month*



    * in Ireland, natch

    And Germany ?
    Does the Hariss clan live there too?

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,077
    DavidL said:

    geoffw said:

    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think "The Ukraine" is deprecated nowadays (and is singular)

    Sadly, come January, it will be academic.
    Suspect there will still be a Ukraine. It just might not mean very much.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,607
    edited November 6
    geoffw said:

    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think "The Ukraine" is deprecated nowadays (and is singular)

    In the English-speaking world during most of the 20th century, Ukraine (whether independent or not) was referred to as "the Ukraine".[21] This is because the word ukraina means 'borderland'[22] so the definite article would be natural in the English language; this is similar to Nederlanden, which means 'low lands' and is rendered in English as "the Netherlands".[23] However, since Ukraine's declaration of independence in 1991, this usage has become politicised and is now rarer, and style guides advise against its use.[24][25] US ambassador William Taylor said that using "the Ukraine" implies disregard for Ukrainian sovereignty.[26] The official Ukrainian position is that "the Ukraine" is both grammatically and politically incorrect.[27][28]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,824
    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I know I keep throwing videos at people, but here's Peter Zeihan - I know, I know - and his "After America: The United Kingdom" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjmBAhTDRXY . It's only 6 minutes long. He's an anglophobe and frequently wrong, but I can follow his logic.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,742

    geoffw said:

    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think "The Ukraine" is deprecated nowadays (and is singular)

    In the English-speaking world during most of the 20th century, Ukraine (whether independent or not) was referred to as "the Ukraine".[21] This is because the word ukraina means 'borderland'[22] so the definite article would be natural in the English language; this is similar to Nederlanden, which means 'low lands' and is rendered in English as "the Netherlands".[23] However, since Ukraine's declaration of independence in 1991, this usage has become politicised and is now rarer, and style guides advise against its use.[24][25] US ambassador William Taylor said that using "the Ukraine" implies disregard for Ukrainian sovereignty.[26] The official Ukrainian position is that "the Ukraine" is both grammatically and politically incorrect.[27][28]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine
    I’m glad people have gotten used to “Czechia” rather than having to say “the Czech Republic”.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,780
    edited November 6
    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    I'll say this for the Harisses - they don't give up easily.
    Just as Kamala of that ilk gets knocked down up pops Simon to offer another general election later this month*



    * in Ireland, natch

    And Germany ?
    Does the Hariss clan live there too?

    No but another election on the offing

    https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-coalition-government-collapse-olaf-scholz-finance-minister-christian-lindner/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,716
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think you're overdoing the exports angle, tariffs would undoubtedly hurt us but I'm not sure it will be as bad as forecast, the vast majority of our exports to the US are intangible services which aren't subject to tariffs or quotas. If anything the UK will be one of the few countries to maintain very strong economic ties to the US because of the nature of our interaction with the US economy. We export services to them and they export services to us, the large exports we do have to the US is defence which is highly unlikely to come under any tariff regime due to national security concerns and the DoD not wanting to pay more money for existing contracts that have already been signed. The other big one is pharmaceutical products which is an area where Trump is trying to reduce prices so again, tariffs here seem unlikely. I'd be surprised if more than 10% of our export value actually gets pushed into tariffable categories.
    I was thinking more of the severely negative consequences of such a stupid policy for international trade generally and the US economy in particular. If they end up in recession as a result of this idiocy they will have less demand for our services.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,352
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Why have food prices gone up so much more in the US than the UK?
    It's about the same.
    Americans eat so much more food.
    So it seems more.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,824

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
    Command economies collapse in on themselves, all you can hope is that you don’t end up with a mass starvation event or genocide.
    I know. But they collapse in on themselves eventually. The Soviet Union lasted in one form or another for nearly 70 years. The NHS has lasted for nearly 80 years. You can designate basic foodstuffs as strategic goods and ensure that enough is purchased for people. We did that for quite a while during the corporatist era, with things like the milk marketing board. Not fancy stuff, but basics like milk, coffee, meat, eggs, etc. The Biden administration didn't do this and is now a one-term government with a senile head.

    Leading a liberal democracy for one term is better than leading an authoritarian dictatorship for five.
    There's no quicker way of getting an authoritarian dictatorship than not being able to feed your children.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,713
    I assume this has been posted, but 9pm (UK time) for Kamala to make the public 'accept the defeat' speech.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,352
    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    geoffw said:

    I'll say this for the Harisses - they don't give up easily.
    Just as Kamala of that ilk gets knocked down up pops Simon to offer another general election later this month*



    * in Ireland, natch

    Rolf out soon too?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,580
    Scanning the thread. Good grief does this really mean that Boris is planning a come back?
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,713
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Ash Sarkar
    @AyoCaesar
    ·
    9h
    In the last 4 years, American food prices have gone up by 22%. Like I'm sorry, but running a campaign on the threat to democracy when people are unable to afford staple groceries was completely bonkers.

    https://x.com/AyoCaesar/status/1854097354065940488

    Whats the alternative? Govt food subsidies of 22%? I guess its surrender Ukraine for the good of global inflation.
    Price controls and harsh punishment for racketeers. Scour the earth for staples, pay over the odds for them, and ship them in by the supertanker. Tax the rich to pay for it. We are so in thrall to the neo liberalism settlement we forget how mighty government can be. UK did it in WW2 when it bought up the whole of India's tea supply and bribed and corrupted Spain to stay out of WW2. It can be done, we just lack the will to do it.
    There’s a reason why industrialised capitalist countries not situated in war zones don’t have food shortages. And it’s because they *dont* do this.
    I know that. And I know the theory. But I also know that a government that hand-wrings and goes "oh, deary me, what can we do" will not last. We have just had an object lesson in this. They thought they could ride it out and ignore it. They were wrong.
    Command economies collapse in on themselves, all you can hope is that you don’t end up with a mass starvation event or genocide.
    I know. But they collapse in on themselves eventually. The Soviet Union lasted in one form or another for nearly 70 years. The NHS has lasted for nearly 80 years. You can designate basic foodstuffs as strategic goods and ensure that enough is purchased for people. We did that for quite a while during the corporatist era, with things like the milk marketing board. Not fancy stuff, but basics like milk, coffee, meat, eggs, etc. The Biden administration didn't do this and is now a one-term government with a senile head.

    Leading a liberal democracy for one term is better than leading an authoritarian dictatorship for five.
    There's no quicker way of getting an authoritarian dictatorship than not being able to feed your children.
    Not being able to feed your cat? Have you seen how they... stare?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,710
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    I can't say how gutted I am by this result. Not just because I think that Harris would have been a worthy POTUS. Not even because Trump is simply not. The consequences for us are going to be several and very difficult to deal with.

    NATO is almost certainly over. It might remain on paper but the US is no longer committed to it. We need to look elsewhere for our security.

    The Ukraine are going to be either humiliated or driven into a shameful peace. What, if anything, can we do about this and what are we willing to do?

    The world economy is at serious risk from US tariffs. That includes us. The US is our biggest single market for exports. If that gets difficult we are going to hurt, badly.

    More fundamentally, the US as our big brother partner, that we have relied on since WW 2 is gone. It is America first. No interest in world affairs. Transactional relationships with all. More like the US as they were before the war. So many of our assumptions have been undermined. We need to look to ourselves once more and it is going to be hard. Already the very modest increase in defence spending in the budget looks woefully inadequate. Closer cooperation with our European neighbours inevitable. Hard, hard decisions on Ukraine. #

    Life is going to be much harder. We have taken the US for granted in many ways. We will now pay the price.

    I think you're overdoing the exports angle, tariffs would undoubtedly hurt us but I'm not sure it will be as bad as forecast, the vast majority of our exports to the US are intangible services which aren't subject to tariffs or quotas. If anything the UK will be one of the few countries to maintain very strong economic ties to the US because of the nature of our interaction with the US economy. We export services to them and they export services to us, the large exports we do have to the US is defence which is highly unlikely to come under any tariff regime due to national security concerns and the DoD not wanting to pay more money for existing contracts that have already been signed. The other big one is pharmaceutical products which is an area where Trump is trying to reduce prices so again, tariffs here seem unlikely. I'd be surprised if more than 10% of our export value actually gets pushed into tariffable categories.
    Tim Shipman had a pretty level headed piece in The Times printed prior to the vote on how things might go. Says Starmer and Lammy will get on fine with him, Trump still sees us as a key ally and Ukraine / Russia might play out quite differently under him to the doom forecasts. He might be completely wrong of course but it makes a change from reading some of the more reflexive takes.

    https://x.com/shippersunbound/status/1854081017360920777?s=46&t=Vp6NqNN4ktoNY0DO98xlGA
Sign In or Register to comment.