In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
I was fairly convinced that Hilary would only be a one-term president. Now she'll be a permanent non-president ...
Now, how about Trump? Well, he's a wheeler-dealer, not a politician. The two share some similar skillsets, but also different ones. If he just wants to be a president, he'll be fine. If he wants to actually *do* things, then he might find that the political system will prevent him in ways the commerce system did not.
I can imagine him getting bored and frustrated very quickly. Just like Obama would have, if Obama had not enjoyed politics so much.
Looking at the positives: he is a wheeler-dealer. He's a salesman: up to now, he's been selling himself and his brand. It's perfectly possible for him to *sell* good policies that would better America and the world.
Possible, but sadly unlikely IMO.
The strength of the generic republican in the polls (Check Rubio's performance in Florida) suggests to me that he gets back in personally.
Also expectations for him are practically zero so far as I can work out from every vox pop I've heard.
Meanwhile I think the DNC run Warren, and lose.
I doubt it? I think it's going to be some time before the Dems run a liberal from Massachusetts for pres. The parallels with Kerry in 2004 would be too much and with the thrashing in 1988, third time wouldn't be the charm.
Given the present mood of Democrats they are certainly not going to run an establishment centrist again in 2020, anti corporate populist is most likely, Kerry and Dukakis were both liberals but establishment ones, neither were as economically radical as Sanders and Warren
'And Brexit Britain will have to choose a side. Trump wants less free trade, not more; but any kind of deal with the Americans would be dependent on us not having a deal with the Chinese.'
You must be one of the few people that knows exactly what Trump's trade policy is going to be .
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
The contract was torn when Gordon Brown promised "British Jobs For British Workers".
It was torn again when the likes of Applegarth and Goodwin walked away with millions of taxpayers money.
It was torn again when Cameron gave his no ifs no buts pledge to reduce immigration.
It was torn again when the LibDems voted to increase tuition fees.
It was torn again when Philip Green walked away from BHS.
It wasn't right wing populists who ripped down the established social order - they just responded to the established social order having been ripped down..
It was the greed and deceit of those at the top of the established social order who destroyed it.
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
I was fairly convinced that Hilary would only be a one-term president. Now she'll be a permanent non-president ...
Now, how about Trump? Well, he's a wheeler-dealer, not a politician. The two share some similar skillsets, but also different ones. If he just wants to be a president, he'll be fine. If he wants to actually *do* things, then he might find that the political system will prevent him in ways the commerce system did not.
I can imagine him getting bored and frustrated very quickly. Just like Obama would have, if Obama had not enjoyed politics so much.
Looking at the positives: he is a wheeler-dealer. He's a salesman: up to now, he's been selling himself and his brand. It's perfectly possible for him to *sell* good policies that would better America and the world.
Possible, but sadly unlikely IMO.
The strength of the generic republican in the polls (Check Rubio's performance in Florida) suggests to me that he gets back in personally.
Also expectations for him are practically zero so far as I can work out from every vox pop I've heard.
Meanwhile I think the DNC run Warren, and lose.
The problem the Amercians may have is getting him out of the White House. As his role model is Putin, I expect action on the 22nd Amendment at the beginning of the 2nd term.
Bookies will be very happy to take your money on Trump being a three term president.
Not going to happen.
"Not going to happen". How many times have we heard that.... ...Trump has so many skeletons in his closets that I can easily see him either trying to become a third term President or making former presidents exempt from prosecution.
Trump will be 78 if he serves for two terms. Perhaps one of his sons will be running after him or something. He will NOT
Listen if you can find any post of me saying something won't happen when it has I'm all ears. I never, ever wrote off Trump's chances.
An unintended consequence of Trump's election is that his America First policy will almost certainly accelerate the United States' relative decline as a global power and leave the way clearer for China's rise. TPP for instance was the cornerstone of Obama's pivot to Asia, by bringing in other Asian and Pacific countries into the American fold in competition with Chinese overtures to those countries. With Trump's rejection of TPP and internationalisation generally, those countries will see their interests lying more closely with China.
That's the nub of it brilliantly summarised. Exoterically Trump is America Redux, Esoterically Trump is about the decline of the West. Clearly others will take the reverse view but it is epochal. One of those moments long term gradual trends incarnate.
The 'west' is morally and intellectually bankrupt. It hasn't so much given up as sold out. I realised this 15 years ago at university and it has been reinforced throughout the 10 years of my working life. Everyone around me has been zombified and slavishly adheres to 'the system' to advance and enrich themselves, sometimes with delusions that what they are changing the system on the inside.
Ultimately who among us is ready to go to war? I don't know anyone who would willingly go to war over anything. We're a nation of pathetic cowards. The failings of the west were all to clear with ISIS, and with Crimea. It is a line of collapsing dominos. Trump is perhaps the biggest to date.
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
It's a bit embarrassing that Farage has made it in America as the latest in a long line of joke Englishmen - Benny Hill probably being the closest comparison. It makes Americans think we're all like that. How long before Nigel is a appearing on Fox News sipping tea from a china cup and wearing a bowler hat?
Is that why George Osborne is heading to the USA ?
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
Surely that should be:
2012 against 2004 for 1996 for 1984 for 1980 against 1972 for 1964 for 1956 for 1936 for
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
Surely that should be:
2012 against 2004 for 1996 for 1984 for 1980 against 1972 for 1964 for 1956 for 1936 for
'76 is against (Ford), surely?
And '68 is effectively against as it saw Johnson turfed out rather than facing again.
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
So Obama was relatively crap.
It also depends on where you start from. Obama had a big margin in 2008.
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
So Obama was relatively crap.
Yes - and he was lucky he was running against an uninspiring establishment candidate.
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
So Obama was relatively crap.
Hmm - well he took Indiana in his first term, so the direction of travel would have been quite hard to head forwards from there.
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
Good post. Anyone who cheers on the mob is a fool and a tool. It is the liberal leavers who will come to regret the Brexit decision the most, because the forces it has unleashed are uncontrollable.
I thought you'd enjoy it. Discussing the big demographic shifts is interesting research but if you're making declarations on it you have to deal with if Comey's letter mattered
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
Surely that should be:
2012 against 2004 for 1996 for 1984 for 1980 against 1972 for 1964 for 1956 for 1936 for
'76 is against (Ford), surely?
And '68 is effectively against as it saw Johnson turfed out rather than facing again.
But 1976 was not after a 'new party' POTUS first term as Pulpstar asked:
1968 Rep win 1972 election after first Rep term 1976 election after second Rep term
likewise
1960 Dem wins 1964 election after first Dem term 1968 election after second Dem term
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
So Obama was relatively crap.
Yes - and he was lucky he was running against an uninspiring establishment candidate.
Like Trump, Lol. They have more in common then they think, both popular with rural white voters in the upper mid west.
Meanwhile, with the President have so little power I can see why they took a chance on him. Trumps base will be furious......
President-elect Donald Trump has said he plans to deport two to three million undocumented immigrants with criminal records from the country immediately - and has insisted that will build his wall.
In an interview with CBS's 60 Minutes that airs on Sunday evening - his first since winning the election - Trump insisted that he will build the wall along the US-Mexico border that was a vital part of his presidential campaign.
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
I didn't go so far, and was at my local war memorial this morning wearing a poppy for the wreath laying.
I have however got sick of the poppy police enforcing compliance. The football row for a start, but also the absurdity of the cookiemonster poppy row. Virture signalling at its very worst.
First time ever been tempted to buy a white poppy as it seems to get the bigots much more enraged than none at all, but then I thought that might be against the pacific intentions of said poppy.
The white poppy has a complicated reputation... for a while it was the Appeasement Poppy -
"The Peace Pledge Union pursued peace and appeasement well beyond Munich. Along with the British Union of Fascists, with which it formed an alliance on this issue, its Peace News paper became a prominent outlet arguing that German territorial demands were reasonable and should be conceded peacefully. The PPU took this well beyond advocating giving Hitler the Sudetenland at Munich. The PPU also divided the pacifist movement when it published Bloomsbury artist Clive Bell's pamphlet 'Warmongers', which proposed a 'Pax Germanica' in which Germany should be permitted to 'absorb' France, Poland, the Low Countries and the Balkans to keep the peace. "
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
Surely that should be:
2012 against 2004 for 1996 for 1984 for 1980 against 1972 for 1964 for 1956 for 1936 for
'76 is against (Ford), surely?
And '68 is effectively against as it saw Johnson turfed out rather than facing again.
But 1976 was not after a 'new party' POTUS first term as Pulpstar asked:
1968 Rep win 1972 election after first Rep term 1976 election after second Rep term
likewise
1960 Dem wins 1964 election after first Dem term 1968 election after second Dem term
Actually, you're completely right, and I'm completely wrong.
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
Good post. Anyone who cheers on the mob is a fool and a tool. It is the liberal leavers who will come to regret the Brexit decision the most, because the forces it has unleashed are uncontrollable.
There is a nauseating arrogance to those who claim that the last 40 years or so have been some golden age of society and politics the passing of which we should mourn. It is connected to an inherent cowardice on the part of left wingers who believe that without the overriding nanny state we are somehow all doomed. It always was and always will be utter shameful bollocks.
In 2020 we may get the clash of insurgencies we missed in 2016 with Elizabeth Warren building on Sanders' insurrection to win the Democratic nomination to take on President Trump
I'm assuming that Trump will be a one term President.
Why ?
Historical precedent suggests two terms.
Don's not really a man for precedents tho'..
One term Presidents:
George HW Bush (41), Jimmy Carter (39), Gerald Ford (38), 31, 27, 23, 22.
The point about Trump is that he doesn't try to build consensus. One term will be enough for him to alienate everybody, including the electorate. He surrounds himself with 'Yes' men and family, it's not a good sign.
Most one term presidents 'follow their own party'.
Jimmy Carter is the odd one out here, the exception that proves the rule if you like.
I'm not saying it is impossible for the Democrats, but they'll need an exceptionally strong candidate to do it with.
Alternatively, most one term Presidents only had small initial mandates, and Trump fits the bill exactly there.
Which way is the swing normally after a "new party" POTUS first term ?
2012, against 2004, for 1996, for 1984, for 1980, against 1976, against 1968, against
So Obama was relatively crap.
Yes - and he was lucky he was running against an uninspiring establishment candidate.
Like Trump, Lol. They have more in common then they think, both popular with rural white voters in the upper mid west.
Meanwhile, with the President have so little power I can see why they took a chance on him. Trumps base will be furious......
The Dems are a good bet for the 2018 mid-terms, Trump voters will have much less motivation to turn out for Ryan and McConnell than the Democrats will to send a message of opposition to Trump. Turnout wise it could be the reverse of 2016 and 2014 when it was GOP voters who were most enthused while Democratic turnout fell off after Obama's re-election in 2012
Question: Apparently, Clinton won the bottom two income quintiles, but Trump won the top three. But the electoral map shows, largely, Trump winning the poor inland counties and Clinton winning the rich counties around the cities. Of course, Clinton's cities will include a lot of poor areas as well, and Trump's countryside rich spots. But the overall pattern seems wrong. Is the data on who voted for whom wrong? (Of course, the only pattern we can be sure of is the geographical one.) Or is the countryside not as poor as we are led to believe? Or is it more complicated than that?
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
Good post. Anyone who cheers on the mob is a fool and a tool. It is the liberal leavers who will come to regret the Brexit decision the most, because the forces it has unleashed are uncontrollable.
We don't really have " the mob" in this country in this day and age.
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
The contract was torn when Gordon Brown promised "British Jobs For British Workers".
It was torn again when the likes of Applegarth and Goodwin walked away with millions of taxpayers money.
It was torn again when Cameron gave his no ifs no buts pledge to reduce immigration.
It was torn again when the LibDems voted to increase tuition fees.
It was torn again when Philip Green walked away from BHS.
It wasn't right wing populists who ripped down the established social order - they just responded to the established social order having been ripped down..
It was the greed and deceit of those at the top of the established social order who destroyed it.
The moderate, rational, sensible people have governed so poorly that they make the populists look good by comparison.
Question: Apparently, Clinton won the bottom two income quintiles, but Trump won the top three. But the electoral map shows, largely, Trump winning the poor inland counties and Clinton winning the rich counties around the cities. Of course, Clinton's cities will include a lot of poor areas as well, and Trump's countryside rich spots. But the overall pattern seems wrong. Is the data on who voted for whom wrong? (Of course, the only pattern we can be sure of is the geographical one.) Or is the countryside not as poor as we are led to believe? Or is it more complicated than that?
Clinton won the bottom income group (Sub $30k)
But Trump got a 16 point swing in his favour there.
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
I didn't go so far, and was at my local war memorial this morning wearing a poppy for the wreath laying.
I have however got sick of the poppy police enforcing compliance. The football row for a start, but also the absurdity of the cookiemonster poppy row. Virture signalling at its very worst.
First time ever been tempted to buy a white poppy as it seems to get the bigots much more enraged than none at all, but then I thought that might be against the pacific intentions of said poppy.
The white poppy has a complicated reputation... for a while it was the Appeasement Poppy -
"The Peace Pledge Union pursued peace and appeasement well beyond Munich. Along with the British Union of Fascists, with which it formed an alliance on this issue, its Peace News paper became a prominent outlet arguing that German territorial demands were reasonable and should be conceded peacefully. The PPU took this well beyond advocating giving Hitler the Sudetenland at Munich. The PPU also divided the pacifist movement when it published Bloomsbury artist Clive Bell's pamphlet 'Warmongers', which proposed a 'Pax Germanica' in which Germany should be permitted to 'absorb' France, Poland, the Low Countries and the Balkans to keep the peace. "
I guess that the PPU was quite in tune with the public mood and our government(s) of the time. Who knows, perhaps appeasement is about to make a comeback.
Question: Apparently, Clinton won the bottom two income quintiles, but Trump won the top three. But the electoral map shows, largely, Trump winning the poor inland counties and Clinton winning the rich counties around the cities. Of course, Clinton's cities will include a lot of poor areas as well, and Trump's countryside rich spots. But the overall pattern seems wrong. Is the data on who voted for whom wrong? (Of course, the only pattern we can be sure of is the geographical one.) Or is the countryside not as poor as we are led to believe? Or is it more complicated than that?
Clinton won the inner city poor by a big margin, Trump the rural poor and Trump had his biggest lead amongst middle income earners, Trump won the highest earners by a small margin, for example by less than Romney had done
The income breakdown between the two parties voters looks one of the only things that is remotely healthy in that exit poll.
Interesting that ALL racial demographics shifted GOP, not just white as shown. Not necessarily voting GOP, but alot of Philly and Detroit just didn't show up for Hillary.
Also the Muslim ban was dropped a long time ago.....and he said he will keep parts of Obamacare.
Is everyone over reacting to how much he will change things?
I suspect so
Both ex-pat Tims seem to think so (Trump can shake up the system but his worst views won't make it onto the statute book), I'm prepared to trust them on this. It's a federal system, and I observed myself that people are genuinely less governed from Washington than Brits from Westminster.
Where strengthening states' rights might have an effect is that it would allow a handful of states to buck the national majority on LGBT rights, abortion, etc.
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
The contract was torn when Gordon Brown promised "British Jobs For British Workers".
It was torn again when the likes of Applegarth and Goodwin walked away with millions of taxpayers money.
It was torn again when Cameron gave his no ifs no buts pledge to reduce immigration.
It was torn again when the LibDems voted to increase tuition fees.
It was torn again when Philip Green walked away from BHS.
It wasn't right wing populists who ripped down the established social order - they just responded to the established social order having been ripped down..
It was the greed and deceit of those at the top of the established social order who destroyed it.
The moderate, rational, sensible people have governed so poorly that they make the populists look good by comparison.
Quite apart from the demented hypocrisy with which the policies were applied...
Also the Muslim ban was dropped a long time ago.....and he said he will keep parts of Obamacare.
Is everyone over reacting to how much he will change things?
The bbc were repeating the Muslim ban policy this morning when trump long long ago did a pivot and said that it would be "extreme vetting" from certain countries not a total ban based on religion.
The media don't help the situation peddling stuff they know isn't true.
The Tories campaign could just be direct Corbyn quotes.
Actually that wouldn't work as a campaign, but you get my point.
I'm not sure the Tories need to run an election campaign at all. Corbyn, McDonnell & Abbott (sounds like a far left solicitor's firm) will do all of their work for them.
"Within minutes of his comments CBS released an excerpt from its interview with Mr Trump, however, in which he made clear that the mass deportations will be going ahead. "
"Within minutes of his comments CBS released an excerpt from its interview with Mr Trump, however, in which he made clear that the mass deportations will be going ahead. "
What an extraordinary Rembrance Sunday. Farage in a Golden Lift, the leader of the FN a heavyweight and relevant interviewee on the BBC's flagship political show and the LotO appeasing the European dictator de jour. Be in no doubt this is late decadence. We're giving up.
I didn't understand it fully until now but this is the first year since I started Infants School aged 5 I've not worn a Poppy. I'd never wear a Poppy unless I'd donated to the RBL. Donating to the RBL is a symbolic upholding on the social contract I inherited as a Briton. But that social contract was torn , not torn up , but torn on 23rd of June. The symbolism seemed inadequate this year. So I donated to the German Red Cross' Syria relief work instead.
This didn't make me feel any better. It felt like a stage of grief. But then came Farage and the Golden Lift, Le Pen and venial Corbyn's appeasement. Why should I feel an ounce of regret ? All this ripping down of established social order by right wing populists is as much a form of liberal individualism as legal pot or turbo consumerism. Social conservatives currently cheering the mob on should be very careful what they wish for.
Good post. Anyone who cheers on the mob is a fool and a tool. It is the liberal leavers who will come to regret the Brexit decision the most, because the forces it has unleashed are uncontrollable.
Quite right - I learnt my lesson on AV, voting against as it wasn't a good enough change for me, proportional or bust. I've had 5 years of being told I supported a First Past a The Post when I did no such thing. (Sorry to derail the discussion but we are overdue an AV thread.)
So although I've no love for the EU as an organisation, I wasn't going to make that mistake again this year, as I could see what would be unleashed - and it's only starting. I hate what the June vote said about us as a country, and I'm still despairing at the lack of anyone seriously trying to unite the divisions, rather than standing up for the fifty two or forty eight.
"Within minutes of his comments CBS released an excerpt from its interview with Mr Trump, however, in which he made clear that the mass deportations will be going ahead. "
President Le Pen, and esp PrimeMinister Wilders, are looking more and more likely.
Let's assume that the PVV gets 25%, that still probably doesn't lead to PM Wilders given the perfectly proportional nature of the Dutch electoral system.
"Within minutes of his comments CBS released an excerpt from its interview with Mr Trump, however, in which he made clear that the mass deportations will be going ahead. "
Perhaps we need to start speculating on whether it will be a Soft Trump or a Hard Trump ? Or whether A50 will ever be triggered on Trump at all ?
It'll be Quicksilver Trump, shimmering, liquescent, capricious, everyone reeling & uncertain of what's true and what isn't. He may not know himself of course..
"Within minutes of his comments CBS released an excerpt from its interview with Mr Trump, however, in which he made clear that the mass deportations will be going ahead. "
President Le Pen, and esp PrimeMinister Wilders, are looking more and more likely.
Let's assume that the PVV gets 25%, that still probably doesn't lead to PM Wilders given the perfectly proportional nature of the Dutch electoral system.
Didn't say certain or even probably, just more likely. But that likelihood looks set to grow as the USA does the 'impossible' and of course the President reaps the popularity. It's usually easier to follow..
Also the Muslim ban was dropped a long time ago.....and he said he will keep parts of Obamacare.
Is everyone over reacting to how much he will change things?
The bbc were repeating the Muslim ban policy this morning when trump long long ago did a pivot and said that it would be "extreme vetting" from certain countries not a total ban based on religion.
The media don't help the situation peddling stuff they know isn't true.
Also the Muslim ban was dropped a long time ago.....and he said he will keep parts of Obamacare.
Is everyone over reacting to how much he will change things?
I suspect so
Soothing rubbish. Trump will carry out at least 90% of his stated policies and 100% of his unstated ones. America and the world will be changed!
Do you believe the Mexicans will pay for the wall fence?
The Mexican government will be made to pay. It may not all be in dollars, but pay they will. At this moment new parts of the existing fencing is going up. Will a solid high wall follow, I don't know, but it's easier to do than you think; just ask the Israelis.
just been looking at the video of the yale students attacking the professor who defended the right of students to wear any Halloween costume they want. Its a bit nasty on the student concerned, but the narrative is consistent with other reports of the event. Its just tragic and sad that civil rights, the great cause of so many generations with so many great achievements, has come to this, and a reflection of the sad state of affairs in the USA.
Comments
'And Brexit Britain will have to choose a side. Trump wants less free trade, not more; but any kind of deal with the Americans would be dependent on us not having a deal with the Chinese.'
You must be one of the few people that knows exactly what Trump's trade policy is going to be .
It was torn again when the likes of Applegarth and Goodwin walked away with millions of taxpayers money.
It was torn again when Cameron gave his no ifs no buts pledge to reduce immigration.
It was torn again when the LibDems voted to increase tuition fees.
It was torn again when Philip Green walked away from BHS.
It wasn't right wing populists who ripped down the established social order - they just responded to the established social order having been ripped down..
It was the greed and deceit of those at the top of the established social order who destroyed it.
Listen if you can find any post of me saying something won't happen when it has I'm all ears. I never, ever wrote off Trump's chances.
Ultimately who among us is ready to go to war? I don't know anyone who would willingly go to war over anything. We're a nation of pathetic cowards. The failings of the west were all to clear with ISIS, and with Crimea. It is a line of collapsing dominos. Trump is perhaps the biggest to date.
2004, for
1996, for
1984, for
1980, against
1976, against
1968, against
2012 against
2004 for
1996 for
1984 for
1980 against
1972 for
1964 for
1956 for
1936 for
And '68 is effectively against as it saw Johnson turfed out rather than facing again.
Anyone who cheers on the mob is a fool and a tool. It is the liberal leavers who will come to regret the Brexit decision the most, because the forces it has unleashed are uncontrollable.
1968 Rep win
1972 election after first Rep term
1976 election after second Rep term
likewise
1960 Dem wins
1964 election after first Dem term
1968 election after second Dem term
Meanwhile, with the President have so little power I can see why they took a chance on him. Trumps base will be furious......
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/13/politics/paul-ryan-donald-trump-obamacare-deportation-force/index.html
In an interview with CBS's 60 Minutes that airs on Sunday evening - his first since winning the election - Trump insisted that he will build the wall along the US-Mexico border that was a vital part of his presidential campaign.
"The Peace Pledge Union pursued peace and appeasement well beyond Munich. Along with the British Union of Fascists, with which it formed an alliance on this issue, its Peace News paper became a prominent outlet arguing that German territorial demands were reasonable and should be conceded peacefully. The PPU took this well beyond advocating giving Hitler the Sudetenland at Munich. The PPU also divided the pacifist movement when it published Bloomsbury artist Clive Bell's pamphlet 'Warmongers', which proposed a 'Pax Germanica' in which Germany should be permitted to 'absorb' France, Poland, the Low Countries and the Balkans to keep the peace. "
New Hampshire, Maine & Minnesota look the most likely to me.
Nevada is probably slightly trickier due to demographic shifts against.
On the plus side for Democrats, Arizona is now well within reach.
Apparently, Clinton won the bottom two income quintiles, but Trump won the top three. But the electoral map shows, largely, Trump winning the poor inland counties and Clinton winning the rich counties around the cities.
Of course, Clinton's cities will include a lot of poor areas as well, and Trump's countryside rich spots. But the overall pattern seems wrong. Is the data on who voted for whom wrong? (Of course, the only pattern we can be sure of is the geographical one.) Or is the countryside not as poor as we are led to believe? Or is it more complicated than that?
But he will probably say the complete opposite in another interview, talking about how bigly and beautiful it will be.
If the next four years see the wealth of Americans appreciably increase, he'll win. And vice versa.
But Trump got a 16 point swing in his favour there.
Tweet impressions via @realDonaldTrump's handle over the past 28 days = 2.25 BILLION.
The income breakdown between the two parties voters looks one of the only things that is remotely healthy in that exit poll.
Interesting that ALL racial demographics shifted GOP, not just white as shown. Not necessarily voting GOP, but alot of Philly and Detroit just didn't show up for Hillary.
Is everyone over reacting to how much he will change things?
The Tories campaign could just be direct Corbyn quotes.
Actually that wouldn't work as a campaign, but you get my point.
Where strengthening states' rights might have an effect is that it would allow a handful of states to buck the national majority on LGBT rights, abortion, etc.
The media don't help the situation peddling stuff they know isn't true.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/13/jo-cox-charity-single-politicians-pop-stars-rolling-stones-kt-tunstall-david-gray?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
"Within minutes of his comments CBS released an excerpt from its interview with Mr Trump, however, in which he made clear that the mass deportations will be going ahead. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/13/donald-trump-vows-to-immediately-deport-3million-illegal-immigra/
President Le Pen, and esp PrimeMinister Wilders, are looking more and more likely.
So although I've no love for the EU as an organisation, I wasn't going to make that mistake again this year, as I could see what would be unleashed - and it's only starting. I hate what the June vote said about us as a country, and I'm still despairing at the lack of anyone seriously trying to unite the divisions, rather than standing up for the fifty two or forty eight.
Democrats Under Barack Obama
-11 seats in Senate
-60 seats in House
-14 governorships
-900 state legislative seats
Worst since 1922.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6ZVEVufWFI
RIP