" The algorithm operated on a separate computer server than the rest of the Clinton operation as a security precaution, and only a few senior aides were able to access it."
Obviously Clinton was never in control of it then.
What this smells like is: Some spirited marketing person sold a non-technical manager high up in the campaign on their amazing thing. The vendor was terrified that some competent in-house person would see it and inform the client that it was in fact bullshit, so they persuaded them that it all had to be a confidential for-your-eyes-only classified magic thing lest the enemy stumble on their secret weapon.
Obama's successful data program was developed in house. I would assume Ada was a development of that.
" The algorithm operated on a separate computer server than the rest of the Clinton operation as a security precaution, and only a few senior aides were able to access it."
Obviously Clinton was never in control of it then.
What this smells like is: Some spirited marketing person sold a non-technical manager high up in the campaign on their amazing thing. The vendor was terrified that some competent in-house person would see it and inform the client that it was in fact bullshit, so they persuaded them that it all had to be a confidential for-your-eyes-only classified magic thing lest the enemy stumble on their secret weapon.
Obama's successful data program was developed in house. I would assume Ada was a development of that.
Although reading the article but sounds like it was a separate effort which sounds insane.
Strange how not so long good anything Keynesian was derided as the root of all evil.
Apparently borrowing is good and tax cuts are good and here's the UK with a debt of 83% of GDP and a deficit running at £65 - £70 billion annually proposing to ramp up both. If a Labour Chancellor suggested it, there'd be howls of outrage on here.
Stodge Maybe it's the fact that the last 8 years of the USA's history really didn't work that was most relevant. Trump's win is understood in the context of white people getting fed up with being demeaned all the time, men being demeaned all the time, the deficit getting silly, healthcare getting WAY more expensive and with less choice, with the USA deliberately becoming weaker internationally, the desire to enforce one section of society's mores upon another, the number of people on food stamps, the soaring number of people no longer in the labour force, etc, etc - you could fill a page quite easily. I think Joe Blow just had enough and in Hillary he simply saw 4 more years of the same stinking shit.
On topic, on the one hand I agree with FF43 that the actual voting was pretty much a standard partisan turnout contest rather than something fought on new political battle-lines. But on the other there is actually something new happening with Brexit and Trump, which is that anti-trade and anti-immigration people are actually getting what they want in a way that they haven't before. Or at least this seems to be happening; Neither Brexit nor Trump have actually happened yet and nobody knows what Trump will do, or WTF to do about Brexit.
Trade, and to a lesser extent migration, is an area where there's long been a consensus between anyone likely to actually take power. But the voters have never liked it. Since the other side has always ultimately been on the same side, the mainstream has never really felt the need to make positive arguments. This was true way back in the US in 2008 when Obama and Hillary ran against each other pretending they were going to renegotiate NAFTA, and it was true for Conservatives in Britain ever since John Major: They always acted "skeptical" on the EU, to the point that Cameron was affecting to be ready to vote to leave, just weeks before, with only minimal changes, he started leading the campaign to remain. Hillary did the same thing again this time: Faced with somebody attacking TPP, rather than defend TPP, she made an incredibly unconvincing claim not to agree with TPP.
You can get away with this for a long time when both sides secretly agree with each other, but you're ultimately eating your seed-corn, because when a viable candidate finally does come along and start trying to step outside the consensus, you find you haven't got anything to fight them with. The extreme ends of these positions are racist, so you can attack the people who hold them for being racists, but that's liable to backfire if too many voters agree with them, because they'll either be narked off at being insulted or think, "apparently I'm a racist, maybe that's a political philosophy I should explore some more".
If you look at an issue like abortion there's a whole barrage of tested rhetorical weapons ready for either side to deploy. What's the equivalent of "pro-life" or "pro-choice" for migration or trade? The battle has gone unfought, and there's nothing in the tanks. You end up with something lame like "Stronger in" or "Stronger together". I think they're beginning to see that if they don't fight, they're going to lose.
So I agree with Corporeal that we will see the battle-lines shifting a bit, unless Trump and May work out creative ways to screw the populists again and go back to business as usual.
Just heard clip of head of CNN saying they gave Trump too much coverage. Find this and Facebook promise to clamp down on "false" news very worrying. Also when will they get it...Censorship will just encourage even more conspiracy theories.
"Clinton’s data-driven campaign relied heavily on an algorithm named Ada." Ada is not an algorithm, it is a programming language. That statement is like saying her campaign relied heavily on C or Fortran.
I wondered that. I'd assumed they'd been mad enough to call their analysis system the same name as a (sadly) largely defunct, but rather good, military programming language. There's no way they would have implemented the algorithms in Ada the programming language ...
They've used Ada's name, possibly because Ada Lovelace has had a lot of publicity over the last couple of years, and is somewhat of a feminist icon. I'm guessing they got warm & fuzzies from it.
I think it's rather sad that Ada is seen as a feminist icon: her story is probably stronger if not viewed through the prism of a modern feminist agenda.
(As an aside, the film 'Conceiving Ada' with Tilda Swinton in s rather good, if very odd and hard to get hold of).
"Clinton’s data-driven campaign relied heavily on an algorithm named Ada." Ada is not an algorithm, it is a programming language. That statement is like saying her campaign relied heavily on C or Fortran.
Not a language I would use for anything.
Not a language anybody should use for anything....
Interesting article this morning by Roger Bootle in DT (premium-only I'm afraid) about Trump's planned fiscal expansion. Could mean US debt reaches 100% GDP. Bootle reckons Hammond may follow a similar path, cutting taxes and spending on infrastructure.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site.
Trump's win, like Brexit, is part driven by nostalgia - a desire to return to the village, to the romanticised idyll of the past where we were in control of our destiny and where we had all the things that gave our lives meaning and status - job, house, family, control, the way of life we wanted to have without other people telling us how to live.
The trouble with the past is it's a comforting place but it's no help for the present or future. Shaping the future starts with not only the recognition that the present isn't working but the past didn't work either and being receptive to different ideas and ways is how the future gets shaped.
The dangerous thing is that people who use their Twitter and Facebook feeds as barometers of public opinion (without realising that by their very nature they are echo chambers) think that everything they say is not just what they believe, but what is true and mainstream opinion. They are also awash with conspiracy theories which gain bizarre traction. That's how you end up with disbelief and grief when your side loses and an assumption that the world is rigged against you.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
"Clinton’s data-driven campaign relied heavily on an algorithm named Ada." Ada is not an algorithm, it is a programming language. That statement is like saying her campaign relied heavily on C or Fortran.
Not a language I would use for anything.
Why? Ada's far from being a bad language if used for the right purpose. If I was aiming to write a small, embedded system that had to work - e.g. control software for planes, trains, cars - I would strongly consider it. Though I can't imagine why you'd use it for tracking a political campaign, and I bet they didn't.
It has three main disadvantages: *) Lack of people fluent in it; as is the case with all fringe languages. *) Lack of easily reusable code (not necessarily a bad thing for such purposes). *) Lack of 'modern', efficient compiler and other tools.
(My knowledge of the compiler and tools may well be out of date).
Useless fact: if the LDs win the Richmond Park by-election, the percentage of female MPs in the House of Commons will reach 30% for the first time, (assuming the winner in Sleaford & North Hykeham is either the Conservative or UKIP candidate, both of whom are women).
Shame that the LibDems would only be on 11% A real bastion of progressive liberalism
It's progress from the current zero percent though. They'd only need to win 7 more seats with women to have equality. Only.....
Or for some of the more liberal Conservative female MPs to cross the floor to the Lib Dems, Mr Mark. There are several who do not identify with the Conservative-UKIP line that Mrs May has adopted.
Yeah - but they know losers when they look across and see them.
Most of the Tory losers are now in Mrs May`s Cabinet, Mr Mark. I don`t think the Lib Dems would want those.
Useless fact: if the LDs win the Richmond Park by-election, the percentage of female MPs in the House of Commons will reach 30% for the first time, (assuming the winner in Sleaford & North Hykeham is either the Conservative or UKIP candidate, both of whom are women).
Shame that the LibDems would only be on 11% A real bastion of progressive liberalism
It's progress from the current zero percent though. They'd only need to win 7 more seats with women to have equality. Only.....
Or for some of the more liberal Conservative female MPs to cross the floor to the Lib Dems, Mr Mark. There are several who do not identify with the Conservative-UKIP line that Mrs May has adopted.
Yeah - but they know losers when they look across and see them.
Most of the Tory losers are now in Mrs May`s Cabinet, Mr Mark. I don`t think the Lib Dems would want those.
Nice that you are in such a strong position you can be so picky...
Interesting article this morning by Roger Bootle in DT (premium-only I'm afraid) about Trump's planned fiscal expansion. Could mean US debt reaches 100% GDP. Bootle reckons Hammond may follow a similar path, cutting taxes and spending on infrastructure.
It does prove that her motivations are what many leavers suspected - she's not interested in promoting Parliamentary democracy, she simply is looking for methods to either delay or prevent Brexit.
The simple fact is that this is a constitutional matter which is reserved to Westminster under the law that enacted Devolution. I haven't heard any proper legal argument which suggests otherwise.
Perhaps she's interested in promoting Holyrood parliamentary democracy.
" The algorithm operated on a separate computer server than the rest of the Clinton operation as a security precaution, and only a few senior aides were able to access it."
Obviously Clinton was never in control of it then.
What this smells like is: Some spirited marketing person sold a non-technical manager high up in the campaign on their amazing thing. The vendor was terrified that some competent in-house person would see it and inform the client that it was in fact bullshit, so they persuaded them that it all had to be a confidential for-your-eyes-only classified magic thing lest the enemy stumble on their secret weapon.
Obama's successful data program was developed in house. I would assume Ada was a development of that.
"Anyone who imagines the party’s electoral fortunes could be revived by a new leader – a charismatic figure from across the water, perhaps – has not taken the measure of the change that has taken place. Although parts of Labour remain outside Corbyn’s control, including much of local government, the chief power base of any future leader of the party will be the mass movement that Corbyn has built. Realigning Labour with the electorate can only be done against the opposition of most of the party membership. In these conditions a campaign of the sort Neil Kinnock waged against Militant is no longer feasible. Internecine warfare will continue and may intensify, but Labour’s moderate tendency has no chance of regaining control.
Not sure I agree with that either. Maybe just feeling a bit argumentative this morning. Political parties exist to win, to have the power to change things. Even the Lib Dems, Icarus like, wanted their day in the sun. If the left lose mightily, as they will under Corbyn, the party will look elsewhere and many of that new party membership will fade away again.
What matters in Labour ultimately is not control of the membership, but control of the NEC. It is currently finely balanced, which means things are at a bit of an impasse. A slight move either way and one side wins definitively. As ever, it is all about the unions.
I was looking at 2Q numbers for world automotive production, and was amused to see that US production is growing, while Mexican is shrinking.
The best performers (among large-ish producers), you will all be pleased to know, are Canada (+13%), the UK (+12%) and Spain (+11%).
I was also amused to discover that - since 1994 and the introduction of NAFTA - auto imports to the US have declined by more than a million cars a year.
The biggest issue for the rust belt have been that US autos are now made in Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee, and Mississippi rather than arounf the Great Lakes.
Interesting article this morning by Roger Bootle in DT (premium-only I'm afraid) about Trump's planned fiscal expansion. Could mean US debt reaches 100% GDP. Bootle reckons Hammond may follow a similar path, cutting taxes and spending on infrastructure.
Just heard clip of head of CNN saying they gave Trump too much coverage. Find this and Facebook promise to clamp down on "false" news very worrying. Also when will they get it...Censorship will just encourage even more conspiracy theories.
Well, given that the TRump campaign is threatening legal action against people who say mean things about Trump it's a two way street.
An Facebook isn't clamping down on false news, it's clamping down on fake news. Bogus websites made to look like legitimate but non-existent newspapers. There's a cookie cutter template for them that basically fills in The Daily "City Name Here" Times template around the bogus story.
Interesting article this morning by Roger Bootle in DT (premium-only I'm afraid) about Trump's planned fiscal expansion. Could mean US debt reaches 100% GDP. Bootle reckons Hammond may follow a similar path, cutting taxes and spending on infrastructure.
"Clinton’s data-driven campaign relied heavily on an algorithm named Ada." Ada is not an algorithm, it is a programming language. That statement is like saying her campaign relied heavily on C or Fortran.
Not a language I would use for anything.
Why? Ada's far from being a bad language if used for the right purpose. If I was aiming to write a small, embedded system that had to work - e.g. control software for planes, trains, cars - I would strongly consider it. Though I can't imagine why you'd use it for tracking a political campaign, and I bet they didn't.
It has three main disadvantages: *) Lack of people fluent in it; as is the case with all fringe languages. *) Lack of easily reusable code (not necessarily a bad thing for such purposes). *) Lack of 'modern', efficient compiler and other tools.
(My knowledge of the compiler and tools may well be out of date).
Yes, I was about to dispute your claim that Ada is largely defunct. I've not used the language myself, but Wikipedia mentions that it is still widely used in mission-critical control systems. As a strongly typed language incorporating considerable checking for potential runtime errors, it looks like the opposite of, e.g. Python. I can certainly imagine the usefulness of such a language in vital embedded software, where code reliability rather than rapid development time is the priority.
Interesting article this morning by Roger Bootle in DT (premium-only I'm afraid) about Trump's planned fiscal expansion. Could mean US debt reaches 100% GDP. Bootle reckons Hammond may follow a similar path, cutting taxes and spending on infrastructure.
Don't worry, I agree on the pre-election plan... some things might go the way of the wall. Trump wasn't really ever targeting a rise in government spending and/or an increase in the role of the state.
I was looking at 2Q numbers for world automotive production, and was amused to see that US production is growing, while Mexican is shrinking.
The best performers (among large-ish producers), you will all be pleased to know, are Canada (+13%), the UK (+12%) and Spain (+11%).
I was also amused to discover that - since 1994 and the introduction of NAFTA - auto imports to the US have declined by more than a million cars a year.
The biggest issue for the rust belt have been that US autos are now made in Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee, and Mississippi rather than arounf the Great Lakes.
The reason for the displacement of auto manufacturing away from the Great Lakes area is the more favourable labour laws for employers.
Interesting article this morning by Roger Bootle in DT (premium-only I'm afraid) about Trump's planned fiscal expansion. Could mean US debt reaches 100% GDP. Bootle reckons Hammond may follow a similar path, cutting taxes and spending on infrastructure.
I was looking at 2Q numbers for world automotive production, and was amused to see that US production is growing, while Mexican is shrinking.
The best performers (among large-ish producers), you will all be pleased to know, are Canada (+13%), the UK (+12%) and Spain (+11%).
I was also amused to discover that - since 1994 and the introduction of NAFTA - auto imports to the US have declined by more than a million cars a year.
The biggest issue for the rust belt have been that US autos are now made in Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee, and Mississippi rather than arounf the Great Lakes.
The reason for the displacement of auto manufacturing away from the Great Lakes area is the more favourable labour laws for employers.
In other words, they get to screw the non-unionised southern workers.
Just heard clip of head of CNN saying they gave Trump too much coverage. Find this and Facebook promise to clamp down on "false" news very worrying. Also when will they get it...Censorship will just encourage even more conspiracy theories.
Well, given that the TRump campaign is threatening legal action against people who say mean things about Trump it's a two way street.
An Facebook isn't clamping down on false news, it's clamping down on fake news. Bogus websites made to look like legitimate but non-existent newspapers. There's a cookie cutter template for them that basically fills in The Daily "City Name Here" Times template around the bogus story.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
BUT....I am trying to look at this at how to we avoid another Trump. Well CNN think we should reduce coverage of what they actually say, that will do it. It is a) censorship, which never has a good outcome and b) again failure to understand or want to understand why he won.
Again, although Zuckerberg says fake news on Facebook didn't win it for Trump, some outlets are again using this as an excuse for him winning. They were also shall we kindly saying already adjusting the trending patterns of news on their site, and again this just reinforces the conspiracy theorists.
Like Brexit, we have these easy excuses for a result certain people don't like, it was the thick racists watching CNN and believing everything they read on The Facebook. For starters, the thick racists ain't watching the Clinton News Network.
Like Brexit many thick racists voted to leave, but they don't make anywhere near 50% of the population. In the US, educational standards aren't as high and there are more issues with race, but again there are many more complicated factors to why Trump beat Clinton, than racists, CNN showing Trump speeches or The Facebook.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Not so much, outside of Silicon Valley (obviously a big exception). There is a surprising level of poverty in California, and its schools now rank with Alabama and Mississippi.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site.
Trump's win, like Brexit, is part driven by nostalgia - a desire to return to the village, to the romanticised idyll of the past where we were in control of our destiny and where we had all the things that gave our lives meaning and status - job, house, family, control, the way of life we wanted to have without other people telling us how to live.
The trouble with the past is it's a comforting place but it's no help for the present or future. Shaping the future starts with not only the recognition that the present isn't working but the past didn't work either and being receptive to different ideas and ways is how the future gets shaped.
The dangerous thing is that people who use their Twitter and Facebook feeds as barometers of public opinion (without realising that by their very nature they are echo chambers) think that everything they say is not just what they believe, but what is true and mainstream opinion. They are also awash with conspiracy theories which gain bizarre traction. That's how you end up with disbelief and grief when your side loses and an assumption that the world is rigged against you.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
I was looking at 2Q numbers for world automotive production, and was amused to see that US production is growing, while Mexican is shrinking.
The best performers (among large-ish producers), you will all be pleased to know, are Canada (+13%), the UK (+12%) and Spain (+11%).
I was also amused to discover that - since 1994 and the introduction of NAFTA - auto imports to the US have declined by more than a million cars a year.
The biggest issue for the rust belt have been that US autos are now made in Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee, and Mississippi rather than arounf the Great Lakes.
The reason for the displacement of auto manufacturing away from the Great Lakes area is the more favourable labour laws for employers.
I think it's a bit more complex than just that. Bear with me:
The Great Lakes, and especially the big cities, have appalling demographics. They are losing people, but not losing liabilities. So they have ever greater pension costs, but a diminishing tax base. This has led to a number of municipal bankruptcies in the region, and more are coming. In turn, this has led to local government trying to extract maximum revenues from the businesses in the area, and that's meant squeezing the auto industry until it left.
Another issue is that, even where firms keep production and increase output, auto manufacturing no longer employs massive numbers of high paid skilled manual workers. Fort Dearborn used to employ 130,000 people. It now employs fewer than 4,000. Auto making simply doesn't create the number of working class jobs it used to.
The move to automation - and to factories with fewer people - mean that people don't need to be in places with historic automotive manufacturing experience. As an example, Tesla's factory is in Oakland, which is the slightly cheaper neighbour to San Francisco and the Valley (but which is definitely not low cost).
There is no serious industrial plan for the rust belt; no joined up thinking that recognises that municipal government is bust, and that there needs to be massive amounts of retraining. Germany, Sweden and Switzerland have all proven you can have healthy manufacturing industries, full employment, high wages, and trade surpluses. And all those countries have done it through embracing trade, rather than seeking to protect dying industries and business models.
Donald Trump is likely to replicate the famous Barber boom of the early 1970s, injecting fiscal stimulus to an economy that will only be satisfied by more imports, not fewer.
I think it's a bit more complex than just that. Bear with me:
The Great Lakes, and especially the big cities, have appalling demographics. They are losing people, but not losing liabilities. So they have ever greater pension costs, but a diminishing tax base. This has led to a number of municipal bankruptcies in the region, and more are coming. In turn, this has led to local government trying to extract maximum revenues from the businesses in the area, and that's meant squeezing the auto industry until it left.
Another issue is that, even where firms keep production and increase output, auto manufacturing no longer employs massive numbers of high paid skilled manual workers. Fort Dearborn used to employ 130,000 people. It now employs fewer than 4,000. Auto making simply doesn't create the number of working class jobs it used to.
The move to automation - and to factories with fewer people - mean that people don't need to be in places with historic automotive manufacturing experience. As an example, Tesla's factory is in Oakland, which is the slightly cheaper neighbour to San Francisco and the Valley (but which is definitely not low cost).
There is no serious industrial plan for the rust belt; no joined up thinking that recognises that municipal government is bust, and that there needs to be massive amounts of retraining. Germany, Sweden and Switzerland have all proven you can have healthy manufacturing industries, full employment, high wages, and trade surpluses. And all those countries have done it through embracing trade, rather than seeking to protect dying industries and business models.
Donald Trump is likely to replicate the famous Barber boom of the early 1970s, injecting fiscal stimulus to an economy that will only be satisfied by more imports, not fewer.
The big problem the US has had for a long long time, piss poor public education. Germany, Sweden, Switzerland all have very good education and training across the board. In the US, the top universities are world leaders, but a massive percentage of the population only graduate high school with a very low level of education or attend a piss poor college to do basket weaving.
"Clinton’s data-driven campaign relied heavily on an algorithm named Ada." Ada is not an algorithm, it is a programming language. That statement is like saying her campaign relied heavily on C or Fortran.
Not a language I would use for anything.
Why? Ada's far from being a bad language if used for the right purpose. If I was aiming to write a small, embedded system that had to work - e.g. control software for planes, trains, cars - I would strongly consider it. Though I can't imagine why you'd use it for tracking a political campaign, and I bet they didn't.
It has three main disadvantages: *) Lack of people fluent in it; as is the case with all fringe languages. *) Lack of easily reusable code (not necessarily a bad thing for such purposes). *) Lack of 'modern', efficient compiler and other tools.
(My knowledge of the compiler and tools may well be out of date).
Yes, I was about to dispute your claim that Ada is largely defunct. I've not used the language myself, but Wikipedia mentions that it is still widely used in mission-critical control systems. As a strongly typed language incorporating considerable checking for potential runtime errors, it looks like the opposite of, e.g. Python. I can certainly imagine the usefulness of such a language in vital embedded software, where code reliability rather than rapid development time is the priority.
I learnt to program with Ada. It has a lot to recommend about it.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
I think they still run huge deficits and have massive remedial education requirements, it's gone from having a net gain in graduates to a net loss of graduates. London will never have that problem.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
I think they still run huge deficits and have massive remedial education requirements, it's gone from having a net gain in graduates to a net loss of graduates. London will never have that problem.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Not so much, outside of Silicon Valley (obviously a big exception). There is a surprising level of poverty in California, and its schools now rank with Alabama and Mississippi.
I noticed that down in San Diego, which seemed like a very prosperous successful city. But the districts on the eastern fringes of the city clearly have some significant social problems and locals talk about them very unfavourably, and an hour's drive or so north east are some quite poor places indeed.
Part of its problem is that its population is booming (I think San Diego is one of the fastest growing cities in the US), fuelled by in-migration of people who have either succeeded, or not succeeded, elsewhere. Doubtless this is part of the reverse side of the rust belt coin.
"In the last few days, panels of reporters have interviewed each other about why they and other professional critics missed the story, but when was the last time you saw them talking to the people who made this change happen with that same curiosity.
A network of people across the country, frustrated with government, academia, entertainment and media empires decided to act, and even now, when you watch the “analysis” of the change, what is offered is more naval gazing by the people who didn’t look up over the last 8 years, as wages have fallen and costs have exploded and millions of Americans have cried out for some relief.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
I think they still run huge deficits and have massive remedial education requirements, it's gone from having a net gain in graduates to a net loss of graduates. London will never have that problem.
Never is a big word.
It seems unimaginable. I think within 10 years UCL will be considered better than one of Oxford or Cambridge by virtue of being in London and attracting the world's best on that basis. In its own narrow field Imperial is arguably better than both already.
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Not so much, outside of Silicon Valley (obviously a big exception). There is a surprising level of poverty in California, and its schools now rank with Alabama and Mississippi.
That is America, though, isn't it? Across the country, the divides in wealth are huge and lifetime outcomes are deeply unequal. Just look at life expectancy - truly shocking for the richest country on earth.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Not so much, outside of Silicon Valley (obviously a big exception). There is a surprising level of poverty in California, and its schools now rank with Alabama and Mississippi.
That is America, though, isn't it? Across the country, the divides in wealth are huge and lifetime outcomes are deeply unequal. Just look at life expectancy - truly shocking for the richest country on earth.
Absolute poverty rates are eye watering as well, and by that I don't mean the nonsense relative poverty metric that was misused by Brown in the UK, which results in can't afford a new iPhone 7 = poverty.
The "Whitelash" doesn't explain Trump's win, as he won in White areas that voted for Obama in 2008/12, and gained support among minorities.
We'll need to wait for the full post-election survey but was't more a case of low Dem voting minorities not turning out in the same umbers as 08,12 but Republican minorities turning out at the same rate?
Mr. M, the Great Wall was as offensive as it was defensive.
Outlying towers provided information of enemies too nearby, and standing armies left the wall to attack them.
Unfortunately that aspect became neglected, perhaps due to cost, not too long after the wall's completion. When Genghis Khan rolled up, he simply rode around the Great Wall.
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Not so much, outside of Silicon Valley (obviously a big exception). There is a surprising level of poverty in California, and its schools now rank with Alabama and Mississippi.
That is America, though, isn't it? Across the country, the divides in wealth are huge and lifetime outcomes are deeply unequal. Just look at life expectancy - truly shocking for the richest country on earth.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
The difference between the US and UK in terms of trade is that the US could cut off free trade tomorrow and still have an internal market big enough to sustain itself, I don't think the UK has that option.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
The terrain is very different, and particularly to build in in the west (from memory). Also, constructing the wall is just one issue: you need to maintain and guard it.
People will want to evade the security, and people will make money from it: whether they are drug or people smugglers, or just those who want a better life in the north. You have to have enough security to make it not worth their while. Unless the wall is meant to be as Hadrian's Wall was for most of its time: a control border, not a prohibition border.
Securing the border will cost far more than just 'building a wall'. Technology will help, but will also be limited in scope and ability, and be very, very costly (*).
(*) It shouldn't be, but when government contracts become involved ...
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
I think they still run huge deficits and have massive remedial education requirements, it's gone from having a net gain in graduates to a net loss of graduates. London will never have that problem.
Never is a big word.
It seems unimaginable. I think within 10 years UCL will be considered better than one of Oxford or Cambridge by virtue of being in London and attracting the world's best on that basis. In its own narrow field Imperial is arguably better than both already.
One of the best attributes of both Ox and Cam is that they're not in London.
I really enjoyed Town in my twenties, but as a provincial grammar school lad the bright lights were a bit scary. A medieval town was much more enticing!!
"Anyone who imagines the party’s electoral fortunes could be revived by a new leader – a charismatic figure from across the water, perhaps – has not taken the measure of the change that has taken place. Although parts of Labour remain outside Corbyn’s control, including much of local government, the chief power base of any future leader of the party will be the mass movement that Corbyn has built. Realigning Labour with the electorate can only be done against the opposition of most of the party membership. In these conditions a campaign of the sort Neil Kinnock waged against Militant is no longer feasible. Internecine warfare will continue and may intensify, but Labour’s moderate tendency has no chance of regaining control.
Not sure I agree with that either. Maybe just feeling a bit argumentative this morning. Political parties exist to win, to have the power to change things. Even the Lib Dems, Icarus like, wanted their day in the sun. If the left lose mightily, as they will under Corbyn, the party will look elsewhere and many of that new party membership will fade away again.
What matters in Labour ultimately is not control of the membership, but control of the NEC. It is currently finely balanced, which means things are at a bit of an impasse. A slight move either way and one side wins definitively. As ever, it is all about the unions.
If it is about the unions, it remains the wrong vehicle for leading the country back towards progressive liberal politics.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
Also it's a huge federal construction project, which will create jobs, enrich Trump's friends and create political kickbacks.
Also China: Length of wall: 8,850 kilometers China pop: 75 million to 200 million (Ming dynasty)
I'm unsure that the Great Wall construction is something we'd want to replicate nowadays:
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang ordered construction of the Great Wall around 221 B.C., the labor force that built the wall was made up largely of soldiers and convicts. It is said that as many as 400,000 people died during the wall's construction; many of these workers were buried within the wall itself.
On topic, I'd say I agree with the general tone, but I think there are a few important points to note: * Most people have friends and family with whom they profoundly disagree on politics and cultural and social issues. But they get along and do understand each other. A lot of young Remain voters will have seen their parents vote Leave, and will not hate them for it. They get it, they just do not agree with it. Societal bonds remain extremely strong. * The US has always been an extremely diverse country. Look at the music market - you have never had to make it in Peoria to sell well and to make a fortune. In the UK, that has not been the case, of course, but that's because our market is so much smaller. You can, however, make a lot of money in the European market by just selling well in the UK (or in Spain, France etc). YOu just make more by selling well everywhere. * It is clear that the right and left are now circling towards each other in many areas. Look at what they say about democratic control of the courts and how they agree that the media is biased against them and something must be done about that. And just as Corbyn Labour has few problems with anti-Semitism, Trump's Republicans are equally as relaxed about that and about other types of racism. The right in the UK seemingly has few problems with the Trump approach. Neither side condemns its own, but does condemn the other side. Both, of course, are also anti-free trade. * Social media, the internet and the 24 hour news cycle have changed everything. They magnify differences, feed off them, in fact. This is a very new phenomenon and is a product of globalisation. It is not going to go away. As ever, first adopters have the early advantage. The mainstream has yet to come to terms with it all. But that will happen. * History never ends. Currently, the right has the whip hand in the west. In the US and the UK it is essentially unchallenged. If it fails to deliver, it will slip back and the left will rise once more. And so it will continue.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
I think they still run huge deficits and have massive remedial education requirements, it's gone from having a net gain in graduates to a net loss of graduates. London will never have that problem.
Never is a big word.
It seems unimaginable. I think within 10 years UCL will be considered better than one of Oxford or Cambridge by virtue of being in London and attracting the world's best on that basis. In its own narrow field Imperial is arguably better than both already.
One of the best attributes of both Ox and Cam is that they're not in London.
I really enjoyed Town in my twenties, but as a provincial grammar school lad the bright lights were a bit scary. A medieval town was much more enticing!!
There is also the expense of London. I know Oxford and Cambridge aren't cheap for non-students, but I remember being offered what sounded like a massive funding package for post-grad study at Imperial rather than the big two, but when I really considered living costs of London vs the highly discounted living available, Imperial really wasn't an attractive offer.
Useless fact: if the LDs win the Richmond Park by-election, the percentage of female MPs in the House of Commons will reach 30% for the first time, (assuming the winner in Sleaford & North Hykeham is either the Conservative or UKIP candidate, both of whom are women).
Shame that the LibDems would only be on 11% A real bastion of progressive liberalism
It's progress from the current zero percent though. They'd only need to win 7 more seats with women to have equality. Only.....
Or for some of the more liberal Conservative female MPs to cross the floor to the Lib Dems, Mr Mark. There are several who do not identify with the Conservative-UKIP line that Mrs May has adopted.
Yeah - but they know losers when they look across and see them.
Most of the Tory losers are now in Mrs May`s Cabinet, Mr Mark. I don`t think the Lib Dems would want those.
Even Tory losers, useless as they are , would be an improvement for Lib Dems.
Mr. Jessop, the 'buried in the foundations' myth is probably just that. Bodies decompose, so using them as foundation would destabilise the wall itself, and I suspect it never happened.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
Somewhere along the line we started thinking that globalisation, free trade, GDP growth, corporate profit growth, stock market indices rising and the like were in themselves inherently good. They are only good if they make us better off, and by us I mean essentially everybody. It's no good pointing to how China is booming, voters in the UK and US are not Chinese, or how much giant corporation is making if our wages have stagnated.
Democrats and to an extent Republicans need to find viable post-Trump candidates who can deal with the justified anger of the American populace without embracing Trump's ideas.
Theresa May has to make Brexit work (in the widest sense that she has said), if she doesn't we shouldn't be surprised if the population says "f*ck it" and lets Corbyn or worse have a go.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
Also it's a huge federal construction project, which will create jobs, enrich Trump's friends and create political kickbacks.
Also China: Length of wall: 8,850 kilometers China pop: 75 million to 200 million (Ming dynasty)
I'm unsure that the Great Wall construction is something we'd want to replicate nowadays:
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang ordered construction of the Great Wall around 221 B.C., the labor force that built the wall was made up largely of soldiers and convicts. It is said that as many as 400,000 people died during the wall's construction; many of these workers were buried within the wall itself.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
The terrain is very different, and particularly to build in in the west (from memory). Also, constructing the wall is just one issue: you need to maintain and guard it.
People will want to evade the security, and people will make money from it: whether they are drug or people smugglers, or just those who want a better life in the north. You have to have enough security to make it not worth their while. Unless the wall is meant to be as Hadrian's Wall was for most of its time: a control border, not a prohibition border.
Securing the border will cost far more than just 'building a wall'. Technology will help, but will also be limited in scope and ability, and be very, very costly (*).
(*) It shouldn't be, but when government contracts become involved ...
Does it matter though? It's not like Trump's base has a good handle on how much illegal immigration is occuring... If at some point in his presidency he can point to a wall that basically runs along the border... That will be good enough. And liberals who said it was not possible will look stupid.
The wall is a colossal waste of money... But given the choice of his policies... I'd much rather he focused on that.
Useless fact: if the LDs win the Richmond Park by-election, the percentage of female MPs in the House of Commons will reach 30% for the first time, (assuming the winner in Sleaford & North Hykeham is either the Conservative or UKIP candidate, both of whom are women).
Shame that the LibDems would only be on 11% A real bastion of progressive liberalism
It's progress from the current zero percent though. They'd only need to win 7 more seats with women to have equality. Only.....
Or for some of the more liberal Conservative female MPs to cross the floor to the Lib Dems, Mr Mark. There are several who do not identify with the Conservative-UKIP line that Mrs May has adopted.
Yeah - but they know losers when they look across and see them.
Most of the Tory losers are now in Mrs May`s Cabinet, Mr Mark. I don`t think the Lib Dems would want those.
Even Tory losers, useless as they are , would be an improvement for Lib Dems.
"Anyone who imagines the party’s electoral fortunes could be revived by a new leader – a charismatic figure from across the water, perhaps – has not taken the measure of the change that has taken place. Although parts of Labour remain outside Corbyn’s control, including much of local government, the chief power base of any future leader of the party will be the mass movement that Corbyn has built. Realigning Labour with the electorate can only be done against the opposition of most of the party membership. In these conditions a campaign of the sort Neil Kinnock waged against Militant is no longer feasible. Internecine warfare will continue and may intensify, but Labour’s moderate tendency has no chance of regaining control.
Not sure I agree with that either. Maybe just feeling a bit argumentative this morning. Political parties exist to win, to have the power to change things. Even the Lib Dems, Icarus like, wanted their day in the sun. If the left lose mightily, as they will under Corbyn, the party will look elsewhere and many of that new party membership will fade away again.
What matters in Labour ultimately is not control of the membership, but control of the NEC. It is currently finely balanced, which means things are at a bit of an impasse. A slight move either way and one side wins definitively. As ever, it is all about the unions.
If it is about the unions, it remains the wrong vehicle for leading the country back towards progressive liberal politics.
I agree. But we are where we are. In our FPTP system, there is no realistic alternative to Labour right now.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site.
Trump's win, like Brexit, is part driven by nostalgia - a desire to return to the village, to the romanticised idyll of the past where we were in control of our destiny and where we had all the things that gave our lives meaning and status - job, house, family, control, the way of life we wanted to have without other people telling us how to live.
The trouble with the past is it's a comforting place but it's no help for the present or future. Shaping the future starts with not only the recognition that the present isn't working but the past didn't work either and being receptive to different ideas and ways is how the future gets shaped.
The dangerous thing is that people who use their Twitter and Facebook feeds as barometers of public opinion (without realising that by their very nature they are echo chambers) think that everything they say is not just what they believe, but what is true and mainstream opinion. They are also awash with conspiracy theories which gain bizarre traction. That's how you end up with disbelief and grief when your side loses and an assumption that the world is rigged against you.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
e.g. Trump
Of course. He and his supporters would have been just the same as the HRC fans, if not worse. That's pretty obvious.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
Somewhere along the line we started thinking that globalisation, free trade, GDP growth, corporate profit growth, stock market indices rising and the like were in themselves inherently good. They are only good if they make us better off, and by us I mean essentially everybody. It's no good pointing to how China is booming, voters in the UK and US are not Chinese, or how much giant corporation is making if our wages have stagnated.
Democrats and to an extent Republicans need to find viable post-Trump candidates who can deal with the justified anger of the American populace without embracing Trump's ideas.
Theresa May has to make Brexit work (in the widest sense that she has said), if she doesn't we shouldn't be surprised if the population says "f*ck it" and lets Corbyn or worse have a go.
Agreed - except for Corbo, who lacks the empathic nationalism to make hay with this issue.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
Only in the sense that an elite cadre have most of the money and are unhappy that they don't have it all so keep ripping off the poor. Very like the UK.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site.
Trump's win, like Brexit, is part driven by nostalgia - a desire to return to the village, to the romanticised idyll of the past where we were in control of our destiny and where we had all the things that gave our lives meaning and status - job, house, family, control, the way of life we wanted to have without other people telling us how to live.
The trouble with the past is it's a comforting place but it's no help for the present or future. Shaping the future starts with not only the recognition that the present isn't working but the past didn't work either and being receptive to different ideas and ways is how the future gets shaped.
The dangerous thing is that people who use their Twitter and Facebook feeds as barometers of public opinion (without realising that by their very nature they are echo chambers) think that everything they say is not just what they believe, but what is true and mainstream opinion. They are also awash with conspiracy theories which gain bizarre traction. That's how you end up with disbelief and grief when your side loses and an assumption that the world is rigged against you.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
e.g. Trump
Of course. He and his supporters would have been just the same as the HRC fans, if not worse. That's pretty obvious.
Yup.
It frustrates me that people respond to criticism of protests, 'notmypresident' etc by saying such and such a group would have done it too.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Not so much, outside of Silicon Valley (obviously a big exception). There is a surprising level of poverty in California, and its schools now rank with Alabama and Mississippi.
That is America, though, isn't it? Across the country, the divides in wealth are huge and lifetime outcomes are deeply unequal. Just look at life expectancy - truly shocking for the richest country on earth.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
The difference between the US and UK in terms of trade is that the US could cut off free trade tomorrow and still have an internal market big enough to sustain itself, I don't think the UK has that option.
No, we don't. That's what makes leaving the Single Market such a huge long-term risk; especially as the US becomes less inclined towards free trade and China fills the gaps that the Americans leave behind. We will have to get used to Theresa May and Liam Fox stepping off of aeroplanes in far away places desperately trying to get deals done. And, like the Indians, every country they visit will understand just what a weak hand they have.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
Also it's a huge federal construction project, which will create jobs, enrich Trump's friends and create political kickbacks.
Also China: Length of wall: 8,850 kilometers China pop: 75 million to 200 million (Ming dynasty)
I'm unsure that the Great Wall construction is something we'd want to replicate nowadays:
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang ordered construction of the Great Wall around 221 B.C., the labor force that built the wall was made up largely of soldiers and convicts. It is said that as many as 400,000 people died during the wall's construction; many of these workers were buried within the wall itself.
Although the idea might appeal to some on here ...
They were not burried within the wall itself. Urban myth, thet would have compromised the structural integrity of the wall.
Source for that? Isn't the wall in most places just structural stonework with rubble infill, in which case any (ahem) settlement will be easy to compensate for. It's also 400 people for every 8 or 9 kilometres on average if it was *all* the workers entombed.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
Somewhere along the line we started thinking that globalisation, free trade, GDP growth, corporate profit growth, stock market indices rising and the like were in themselves inherently good. They are only good if they make us better off, and by us I mean essentially everybody. It's no good pointing to how China is booming, voters in the UK and US are not Chinese, or how much giant corporation is making if our wages have stagnated.
Democrats and to an extent Republicans need to find viable post-Trump candidates who can deal with the justified anger of the American populace without embracing Trump's ideas.
Theresa May has to make Brexit work (in the widest sense that she has said), if she doesn't we shouldn't be surprised if the population says "f*ck it" and lets Corbyn or worse have a go.
Agreed - except for Corbo, who lacks the empathic nationalism to make hay with this issue.
Yep, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. Were he to go, then all bets would be off.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site. .
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
e.g. Trump
Of course. He and his supporters would have been just the same as the HRC fans, if not worse. That's pretty obvious.
Yup.
It frustrates me that people respond to criticism of protests, 'notmypresident' etc by saying such and such a group would have done it too.
Two wrongs and all that...
They want to get out and get themselves a job rather than jamming the streets complaining that democracy is BAD and they are offended. Hose them down and make the water very cold.
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site.
Trump's win, like Brexit, is part driven by nostalgia - a desire to return to the village, to the romanticised idyll of the past where we were in control of our destiny and where we had all the things that gave our lives meaning and status - job, house, family, control, the way of life we wanted to have without other people telling us how to live.
The trouble with the past is it's a comforting place but it's no help for the present or future. Shaping the future starts with not only the recognition that the present isn't working but the past didn't work either and being receptive to different ideas and ways is how the future gets shaped.
The dangerous thing is that people who use their Twitter and Facebook feeds as barometers of public opinion (without realising that by their very nature they are echo chambers) think that everything they say is not just what they believe, but what is true and mainstream opinion. They are also awash with conspiracy theories which gain bizarre traction. That's how you end up with disbelief and grief when your side loses and an assumption that the world is rigged against you.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
e.g. Trump
Of course. He and his supporters would have been just the same as the HRC fans, if not worse. That's pretty obvious.
Yes, both Trump and Farage said explicitly that they would not accept the result if they lost. Trump called for a protest march when it looked like the previous election would result in Obama winning the EC but losing the popular vote - he's not doing that this year.
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
Somewhere along the line we started thinking that globalisation, free trade, GDP growth, corporate profit growth, stock market indices rising and the like were in themselves inherently good. They are only good if they make us better off, and by us I mean essentially everybody. It's no good pointing to how China is booming, voters in the UK and US are not Chinese, or how much giant corporation is making if our wages have stagnated.
Democrats and to an extent Republicans need to find viable post-Trump candidates who can deal with the justified anger of the American populace without embracing Trump's ideas.
Theresa May has to make Brexit work (in the widest sense that she has said), if she doesn't we shouldn't be surprised if the population says "f*ck it" and lets Corbyn or worse have a go.
Agreed - except for Corbo, who lacks the empathic nationalism to make hay with this issue.
Yep, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. Were he to go, then all bets would be off.
Superb from the tax payers alliance today on how the idiotic sin taxes have cost the taxpayer a fortune to line the pockets of traders in illicit fags and booze and please the 'lifestyle police'
Just heard clip of head of CNN saying they gave Trump too much coverage. Find this and Facebook promise to clamp down on "false" news very worrying. Also when will they get it...Censorship will just encourage even more conspiracy theories.
Well, given that the TRump campaign is threatening legal action against people who say mean things about Trump it's a two way street.
An Facebook isn't clamping down on false news, it's clamping down on fake news. Bogus websites made to look like legitimate but non-existent newspapers. There's a cookie cutter template for them that basically fills in The Daily "City Name Here" Times template around the bogus story.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
BUT....I am trying to look at this at how to we avoid another Trump. Well CNN think we should reduce coverage of what they actually say, that will do it. It is a) censorship, which never has a good outcome and b) again failure to understand or want to understand why he won.
Again, although Zuckerberg says fake news on Facebook didn't win it for Trump, some outlets are again using this as an excuse for him winning. They were also shall we kindly saying already adjusting the trending patterns of news on their site, and again this just reinforces the conspiracy theorists.
Like Brexit, we have these easy excuses for a result certain people don't like, it was the thick racists watching CNN and believing everything they read on The Facebook. For starters, the thick racists ain't watching the Clinton News Network.
Like Brexit many thick racists voted to leave, but they don't make anywhere near 50% of the population. In the US, educational standards aren't as high and there are more issues with race, but again there are many more complicated factors to why Trump beat Clinton, than racists, CNN showing Trump speeches or The Facebook.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
Not entirely, should he get to shape the Supreme Court, beyond the single appointment currently in his gift. The modern interpretation of the First Amendment, creation of 'judicial activism' that it is, remains vulnerable to judicial activism in the opposite direction.
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
Lalala, hand wave, tumbleweed, look squirrel etc.
Juvenile.
I was referring to the absolute dearth of comment from Leavers on Farage's self promoted lynchpin status, several of whom also assured me & the wider public that Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of Brexit.
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
Lalala, hand wave, tumbleweed, look squirrel etc.
Juvenile.
True though, the Tory frothers cannot believe they will only be able to deal with "The Donald" via their nemesis Nigel. Poetic justice at its finest.
Just heard clip of head of CNN saying they gave Trump too much coverage. Find this and Facebook promise to clamp down on "false" news very worrying. Also when will they get it...Censorship will just encourage even more conspiracy theories.
Well, given that the TRump campaign is threatening legal action against people who say mean things about Trump it's a two way street.
An Facebook isn't clamping down on false news, it's clamping down on fake news. Bogus websites made to look like legitimate but non-existent newspapers. There's a cookie cutter template for them that basically fills in The Daily "City Name Here" Times template around the bogus story.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
BUT....I am trying to look at this at how to we avoid another Trump. Well CNN think we should reduce coverage of what they actually say, that will do it. It is a) censorship, which never has a good outcome and b) again failure to understand or want to understand why he won.
Again, although Zuckerberg says fake news on Facebook didn't win it for Trump, some outlets are again using this as an excuse for him winning. They were also shall we kindly saying already adjusting the trending patterns of news on their site, and again this just reinforces the conspiracy theorists.
Like Brexit, we have these easy excuses for a result certain people don't like, it was the thick racists watching CNN and believing everything they read on The Facebook. For starters, the thick racists ain't watching the Clinton News Network.
Like Brexit many thick racists voted to leave, but they don't make anywhere near 50% of the population. In the US, educational standards aren't as high and there are more issues with race, but again there are many more complicated factors to why Trump beat Clinton, than racists, CNN showing Trump speeches or The Facebook.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
Not entirely, should he get to shape the Supreme Court, beyond the single appointment currently in his gift. The modern interpretation of the First Amendment, creation of 'judicial activism' that it is, remains vulnerable to judicial activism in the opposite direction.
Ted Cruz for SCOTUS potentially.
And there are fair odds that he will replace another Justice as well.
California is now the US equivalent of Merseyside, politically.
And of London economically.
Probably not economically, but maybe in terms of dynamism.
California is essentially a G8 country. It's biggest problem, though, is an absolutely fundamental one: not enough water.
I think they still run huge deficits and have massive remedial education requirements, it's gone from having a net gain in graduates to a net loss of graduates. London will never have that problem.
Never is a big word.
It seems unimaginable. I think within 10 years UCL will be considered better than one of Oxford or Cambridge by virtue of being in London and attracting the world's best on that basis. In its own narrow field Imperial is arguably better than both already.
In response to Corporeal's missive (for which many thanks), I would argue the adage "people like people like themselves" has always held true, As I look back through my life and the friendships and relationships I have had, the common factor is they were all with people with similar traits.
There have always been "echo chambers" - there were fewer once. You might argue there were once only three "upper class, middle class and working class". Now, the number has increased exponentially and include political preference, football team, postcode where you live, the games you play, the tv you watch.
At a fundamental level, it's about trying to re-create the village life from which our forebears came - where you knew everyone and everyone knew you. In a global online world, the village has gone but deep down we want it back and feel comfortable in it.
Yes, strangers are welcome but only if they are like us. PB is much the same. Posters who have expressed views or challenged the prevailing ethos have been hounded and even driven off the site.
Trump's win, like Brexit, is part driven by nostalgia - a desire to return to the village, to the romanticised idyll of the past where we were in control of our destiny and where we had all the things that gave our lives meaning and status - job, house, family, control, the way of life we wanted to have without other people telling us how to live.
The trouble with the past is it's a comforting place but it's no help for the present or future. Shaping the future starts with not only the recognition that the present isn't working but the past didn't work either and being receptive to different ideas and ways is how the future gets shaped.
The dangerous thing is that people who use their Twitter and Facebook feeds as barometers of public opinion (without realising that by their very nature they are echo chambers) think that everything they say is not just what they believe, but what is true and mainstream opinion. They are also awash with conspiracy theories which gain bizarre traction. That's how you end up with disbelief and grief when your side loses and an assumption that the world is rigged against you.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
e.g. Trump
Of course. He and his supporters would have been just the same as the HRC fans, if not worse. That's pretty obvious.
Not really - you are imposing on other political groups your own political desires.
This is why free trade in the US has become unpopular. It has been used by their 1% to enrich themselves at the expense of the common worker. US companies are paying Mexican labour rates and charging the US consumer, US prices. The boom in company profits has been followed by a boom boardroom pay and bonuses while the workers are being told that they are too expensive to keep on or those that remain are being told to accept real terms pay cuts to compete with Mexican labour rates.
Somewhere along the line we started thinking that globalisation, free trade, GDP growth, corporate profit growth, stock market indices rising and the like were in themselves inherently good. They are only good if they make us better off, and by us I mean essentially everybody. It's no good pointing to how China is booming, voters in the UK and US are not Chinese, or how much giant corporation is making if our wages have stagnated.
Democrats and to an extent Republicans need to find viable post-Trump candidates who can deal with the justified anger of the American populace without embracing Trump's ideas.
Theresa May has to make Brexit work (in the widest sense that she has said), if she doesn't we shouldn't be surprised if the population says "f*ck it" and lets Corbyn or worse have a go.
Agreed - except for Corbo, who lacks the empathic nationalism to make hay with this issue.
Yep, Corbyn is the Tory firewall. Were he to go, then all bets would be off.
But he's an impressive firewall.
Corbyn has a ludicrous demeanour. Take the following video (from Tim's Twitter), in which he deals with a really important subject:
I don't disagree with what he says. But listen to the delivery; look at what he's wearing. Examine the setting.
I can't help but laugh, despite the topic. He has no weight, no heft. He's a wet lettuce. Can you see him going into any negotiation with a foreign power?
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
Lalala, hand wave, tumbleweed, look squirrel etc.
Juvenile.
I was referring to the absolute dearth of comment from Leavers on Farage's self promoted lynchpin status, several of whom also assured me & the wider public that Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of Brexit.
Commenting on Scottish politicos, who pretend to have levers when they don't, seems to have blinded to the reality that Farage merely visited Trump. He is not in government, nor even in any elected British office. His only position is as interim leader of a party and MEP, both of which are likely to disappear in the coming months and years.
Lots of hot air, whether from Sturgeon or Farage, don't equal levers of power within the British govt.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
A good deal of the Israeli wall is, I believe a fence.
That would work fine for Trump's purposes. Basically he needs about a mile of concrete with big watchtowers and things for the photo-op, then fences as far as the eye can see anywhere a major road passes through it, then some bollocks about a drone cyber-wall or something for the deserted bits.
Just heard clip of head of CNN saying they gave Trump too much coverage. Find this and Facebook promise to clamp down on "false" news very worrying. Also when will they get it...Censorship will just encourage even more conspiracy theories.
Well, given that the TRump campaign is threatening legal action against people who say mean things about Trump it's a two way street.
An Facebook isn't clamping down on false news, it's clamping down on fake news. Bogus websites made to look like legitimate but non-existent newspapers. There's a cookie cutter template for them that basically fills in The Daily "City Name Here" Times template around the bogus story.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
BUT....I am trying to look at this at how to we avoid another Trump. Well CNN think we should reduce coverage of what they actually say, that will do it. It is a) censorship, which never has a good outcome and b) again failure to understand or want to understand why he won.
Again, although Zuckerberg says fake news on Facebook didn't win it for Trump, some outlets are again using this as an excuse for him winning. They were also shall we kindly saying already adjusting the trending patterns of news on their site, and again this just reinforces the conspiracy theorists.
Like Brexit, we have these easy excuses for a result certain people don't like, it was the thick racists watching CNN and believing everything they read on The Facebook. For starters, the thick racists ain't watching the Clinton News Network.
Like Brexit many thick racists voted to leave, but they don't make anywhere near 50% of the population. In the US, educational standards aren't as high and there are more issues with race, but again there are many more complicated factors to why Trump beat Clinton, than racists, CNN showing Trump speeches or The Facebook.
Trump is bonkers...and he can't because of freedom of speech and all his "open up libel laws" is bollocks.
Not entirely, should he get to shape the Supreme Court, beyond the single appointment currently in his gift. The modern interpretation of the First Amendment, creation of 'judicial activism' that it is, remains vulnerable to judicial activism in the opposite direction.
Ted Cruz for SCOTUS potentially.
And there are fair odds that he will replace another Justice as well.
Do they allow Canadians to sit on the Supreme Court?
With reference to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is it normal for governments to use leaders of opposition parties to implement government policies? And if not, why should that change now?
Another thing the PB Tory leavers got wrong.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
Lalala, hand wave, tumbleweed, look squirrel etc.
Juvenile.
I was referring to the absolute dearth of comment from Leavers on Farage's self promoted lynchpin status, several of whom also assured me & the wider public that Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of Brexit.
Commenting on Scottish politicos, who pretend to have levers when they don't, seems to have blinded to the reality that Farage merely visited Trump. He is not in government, nor even in any elected British office. His only position is as interim leader of a party and MEP, both of which are likely to disappear in the coming months and years.
Lots of hot air, whether from Sturgeon or Farage, don't equal levers of power within the British govt.
It isn't just hot air from Farage
Theresa May is facing a growing Cabinet backlash over her decision to dismiss Nigel Farage despite him being the only British politician to meet with Donald Trump since his victory.
The Telegraph understands a number of members of the Cabinet and other Government ministers believe the Prime Minister's allies have made a mistake by referring to Mr Farage as an “irrelevance”.
Israel: 290.6 billion USD (2013) Length of wall: 650 kilometers Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013) Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
A good deal of the Israeli wall is, I believe a fence.
That would work fine for Trump's purposes. Basically he needs about a mile of concrete with big watchtowers and things for the photo-op, then fences as far as the eye can see anywhere a major road passes through it, then some bollocks about a drone cyber-wall or something for the deserted bits.
Comments
Apparently borrowing is good and tax cuts are good and here's the UK with a debt of 83% of GDP and a deficit running at £65 - £70 billion annually proposing to ramp up both. If a Labour Chancellor suggested it, there'd be howls of outrage on here.
Maybe it's the fact that the last 8 years of the USA's history really didn't work that was most relevant. Trump's win is understood in the context of white people getting fed up with being demeaned all the time, men being demeaned all the time, the deficit getting silly, healthcare getting WAY more expensive and with less choice, with the USA deliberately becoming weaker internationally, the desire to enforce one section of society's mores upon another, the number of people on food stamps, the soaring number of people no longer in the labour force, etc, etc - you could fill a page quite easily. I think Joe Blow just had enough and in Hillary he simply saw 4 more years of the same stinking shit.
They've used Ada's name, possibly because Ada Lovelace has had a lot of publicity over the last couple of years, and is somewhat of a feminist icon. I'm guessing they got warm & fuzzies from it.
I think it's rather sad that Ada is seen as a feminist icon: her story is probably stronger if not viewed through the prism of a modern feminist agenda.
(As an aside, the film 'Conceiving Ada' with Tilda Swinton in s rather good, if very odd and hard to get hold of).
Donald Trump's policies will undoubtedly swell the deficit; the question is whether we'll see economic growth jump to offset this.
There's been far too much evidence this year of people for whom democracy only counts when they win.
It has three main disadvantages:
*) Lack of people fluent in it; as is the case with all fringe languages.
*) Lack of easily reusable code (not necessarily a bad thing for such purposes).
*) Lack of 'modern', efficient compiler and other tools.
(My knowledge of the compiler and tools may well be out of date).
After getting vexed by yesterday's Strictlyathon, I am again a happy bunny.
Very likely to perhaps. I know his spending plans represented a significant increase, but it remains to be seen how many will be pursued.
http://adage.com/article/datadriven-marketing/clinton-trump-match-data-arena/302989/
Which was external to the campaigns, but staffed with a lot of people from the Obama effort:
http://dcinno.streetwise.co/2015/10/12/gw-grad-ceo-obama-data-analytics-team-bluelabs-campaigns/
The best performers (among large-ish producers), you will all be pleased to know, are Canada (+13%), the UK (+12%) and Spain (+11%).
I was also amused to discover that - since 1994 and the introduction of NAFTA - auto imports to the US have declined by more than a million cars a year.
The biggest issue for the rust belt have been that US autos are now made in Alabama, Missouri, Tennessee, and Mississippi rather than arounf the Great Lakes.
If implemented in full would see a massive increase in government debt. See: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/analysis-donald-trumps-tax-plan/full
An Facebook isn't clamping down on false news, it's clamping down on fake news. Bogus websites made to look like legitimate but non-existent newspapers. There's a cookie cutter template for them that basically fills in The Daily "City Name Here" Times template around the bogus story.
The Japanese Yen is still incredibly valuable despite the gov't debts there.
* It has a sizeable current account surplus
I need two more anyway.
BUT....I am trying to look at this at how to we avoid another Trump. Well CNN think we should reduce coverage of what they actually say, that will do it. It is a) censorship, which never has a good outcome and b) again failure to understand or want to understand why he won.
Again, although Zuckerberg says fake news on Facebook didn't win it for Trump, some outlets are again using this as an excuse for him winning. They were also shall we kindly saying already adjusting the trending patterns of news on their site, and again this just reinforces the conspiracy theorists.
Like Brexit, we have these easy excuses for a result certain people don't like, it was the thick racists watching CNN and believing everything they read on The Facebook. For starters, the thick racists ain't watching the Clinton News Network.
Like Brexit many thick racists voted to leave, but they don't make anywhere near 50% of the population. In the US, educational standards aren't as high and there are more issues with race, but again there are many more complicated factors to why Trump beat Clinton, than racists, CNN showing Trump speeches or The Facebook.
Israel:
290.6 billion USD (2013)
Length of wall: 650 kilometers
Israel Pop: 8 million or so
USA GDP: 16.77 trillion USD (2013)
Length of USA-Mexico border 3,201 kilometers
USA pop: 320 millionish
I'm not saying its a great idea, but I don't see a fundamental block to it.
The Great Lakes, and especially the big cities, have appalling demographics. They are losing people, but not losing liabilities. So they have ever greater pension costs, but a diminishing tax base. This has led to a number of municipal bankruptcies in the region, and more are coming. In turn, this has led to local government trying to extract maximum revenues from the businesses in the area, and that's meant squeezing the auto industry until it left.
Another issue is that, even where firms keep production and increase output, auto manufacturing no longer employs massive numbers of high paid skilled manual workers. Fort Dearborn used to employ 130,000 people. It now employs fewer than 4,000. Auto making simply doesn't create the number of working class jobs it used to.
The move to automation - and to factories with fewer people - mean that people don't need to be in places with historic automotive manufacturing experience. As an example, Tesla's factory is in Oakland, which is the slightly cheaper neighbour to San Francisco and the Valley (but which is definitely not low cost).
There is no serious industrial plan for the rust belt; no joined up thinking that recognises that municipal government is bust, and that there needs to be massive amounts of retraining. Germany, Sweden and Switzerland have all proven you can have healthy manufacturing industries, full employment, high wages, and trade surpluses. And all those countries have done it through embracing trade, rather than seeking to protect dying industries and business models.
Donald Trump is likely to replicate the famous Barber boom of the early 1970s, injecting fiscal stimulus to an economy that will only be satisfied by more imports, not fewer.
Part of its problem is that its population is booming (I think San Diego is one of the fastest growing cities in the US), fuelled by in-migration of people who have either succeeded, or not succeeded, elsewhere. Doubtless this is part of the reverse side of the rust belt coin.
A network of people across the country, frustrated with government, academia, entertainment and media empires decided to act, and even now, when you watch the “analysis” of the change, what is offered is more naval gazing by the people who didn’t look up over the last 8 years, as wages have fallen and costs have exploded and millions of Americans have cried out for some relief.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/11/13/conservatives-advice-for-newly-humbled-press.html
Also
China:
Length of wall: 8,850 kilometers
China pop: 75 million to 200 million (Ming dynasty)
I'd suspect that no more than a handful of Mexicans ever got past it.
Outlying towers provided information of enemies too nearby, and standing armies left the wall to attack them.
Unfortunately that aspect became neglected, perhaps due to cost, not too long after the wall's completion. When Genghis Khan rolled up, he simply rode around the Great Wall.
I was assured Nigel Farage would be nowhere near the levers of power in the event of a Leave victory.
The difference between the US and UK in terms of trade is that the US could cut off free trade tomorrow and still have an internal market big enough to sustain itself, I don't think the UK has that option.
The at-all-costs attempts to save the Delta Smelt is the most famous but not the only example.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/forget-the-missing-rainfall-california-wheres-the-delta-smelt-1430085510
People will want to evade the security, and people will make money from it: whether they are drug or people smugglers, or just those who want a better life in the north. You have to have enough security to make it not worth their while. Unless the wall is meant to be as Hadrian's Wall was for most of its time: a control border, not a prohibition border.
Securing the border will cost far more than just 'building a wall'. Technology will help, but will also be limited in scope and ability, and be very, very costly (*).
(*) It shouldn't be, but when government contracts become involved ...
I really enjoyed Town in my twenties, but as a provincial grammar school lad the bright lights were a bit scary. A medieval town was much more enticing!!
When Emperor Qin Shi Huang ordered construction of the Great Wall around 221 B.C., the labor force that built the wall was made up largely of soldiers and convicts. It is said that as many as 400,000 people died during the wall's construction; many of these workers were buried within the wall itself.
http://www.history.com/topics/great-wall-of-china
Although the idea might appeal to some on here ...
* Most people have friends and family with whom they profoundly disagree on politics and cultural and social issues. But they get along and do understand each other. A lot of young Remain voters will have seen their parents vote Leave, and will not hate them for it. They get it, they just do not agree with it. Societal bonds remain extremely strong.
* The US has always been an extremely diverse country. Look at the music market - you have never had to make it in Peoria to sell well and to make a fortune. In the UK, that has not been the case, of course, but that's because our market is so much smaller. You can, however, make a lot of money in the European market by just selling well in the UK (or in Spain, France etc). YOu just make more by selling well everywhere.
* It is clear that the right and left are now circling towards each other in many areas. Look at what they say about democratic control of the courts and how they agree that the media is biased against them and something must be done about that. And just as Corbyn Labour has few problems with anti-Semitism, Trump's Republicans are equally as relaxed about that and about other types of racism. The right in the UK seemingly has few problems with the Trump approach. Neither side condemns its own, but does condemn the other side. Both, of course, are also anti-free trade.
* Social media, the internet and the 24 hour news cycle have changed everything. They magnify differences, feed off them, in fact. This is a very new phenomenon and is a product of globalisation. It is not going to go away. As ever, first adopters have the early advantage. The mainstream has yet to come to terms with it all. But that will happen.
* History never ends. Currently, the right has the whip hand in the west. In the US and the UK it is essentially unchallenged. If it fails to deliver, it will slip back and the left will rise once more. And so it will continue.
Democrats and to an extent Republicans need to find viable post-Trump candidates who can deal with the justified anger of the American populace without embracing Trump's ideas.
Theresa May has to make Brexit work (in the widest sense that she has said), if she doesn't we shouldn't be surprised if the population says "f*ck it" and lets Corbyn or worse have a go.
The wall is a colossal waste of money... But given the choice of his policies... I'd much rather he focused on that.
USD-GBP lowpoint pre-brexit: 1.3868 (10 year, Feb 2016)
USD-GBP right now post-Trump 1.25
Economically Brexit > Trump in terms of scale (For us vs US)
It frustrates me that people respond to criticism of protests, 'notmypresident' etc by saying such and such a group would have done it too.
Two wrongs and all that...
Trump called for a protest march when it looked like the previous election would result in Obama winning the EC but losing the popular vote - he's not doing that this year.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sun-and-mail-online-both-take-down-stories-claiming-jeremy-corbyn-was-dancing-a-jig-on-way-to-cenotaph/
Not entirely, should he get to shape the Supreme Court, beyond the single appointment currently in his gift.
The modern interpretation of the First Amendment, creation of 'judicial activism' that it is, remains vulnerable to judicial activism in the opposite direction.
And there are fair odds that he will replace another Justice as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrQLGyeHdIY
I don't disagree with what he says. But listen to the delivery; look at what he's wearing. Examine the setting.
I can't help but laugh, despite the topic. He has no weight, no heft. He's a wet lettuce. Can you see him going into any negotiation with a foreign power?
Lots of hot air, whether from Sturgeon or Farage, don't equal levers of power within the British govt.
Theresa May is facing a growing Cabinet backlash over her decision to dismiss Nigel Farage despite him being the only British politician to meet with Donald Trump since his victory.
The Telegraph understands a number of members of the Cabinet and other Government ministers believe the Prime Minister's allies have made a mistake by referring to Mr Farage as an “irrelevance”.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/13/theresa-may-facing-cabinet-backlash-over-refusal-to-deal-with-ni/