Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
Which stopped at precisely midnight on US Election Day - obviously when his or her contract finished, having pointlesslessly spent six weeks spamming a site full of people who couldn't vote!
Maybe they were being paid by the side they didn't actually want to win.. so posted on 'influential political sites' :-)
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
How many first term incumbents are Labour, and how many are Tory?
I think Justin's point is that a Tory majority of 34 relies on Tory gains, not Labour ones.
However it is really a summing up of the dire situation for the Labour party that they will be on the defensive for a third straight election. It was really noticeable in 2015, as the results came in: Tory holds taken for granted, the Tories pushing for Labour marginal seats.
Technically, they'd be on the defensive for the fifth straight election, albeit that the places being defended in the first two were deep into natural Tory territory. Labour hasn't made net gains at a general election since 1997 (when it did make more than any party at any post-WWII election). Has any party ever lost seats at five consecutive elections before?
On topic: That's just the media bubble from May's honeymoon unfolding. I don't think it represents any real shift. Though telling that a Tory lead of " only " 9 points represents a retreat these days.
It would only imply a majority of 36 - without allowing for first term incumbency effect for Labour MPs in marginal seats.
Tory and UKIP combined below 50% for the first time in a while. The start of something or just churn?
Brexit is now government policy and a Tory government policy to boot. I expect that to feed into perceptions long term though not in time to impact on A50.
Given Corbyn's personal ratings, the Labour vote share will continue to drag and 33% looks a bit too high to me. Conversely, though, 10% looks a bit too low for the LDs.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
Which stopped at precisely midnight on US Election Day - obviously when his or her contract finished, having pointlesslessly spent six weeks spamming a site full of people who couldn't vote!
Rather than votes, perhaps his motives were to shift markets? – Although PB punters are far too bright to fall for such obvious shilling.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
So long as Theresa May remains crap, Morris Dancers fails to grasp basic classical history knowledge, and we're not using AV, I don't have the energy to be relentless on other matters.
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
The Parliament Act has no impact on whether Mrs May can call an election.
Are you perhaps thinking about the Fixed Term Parliament Act?
I've said it before I will say it again.
Theresa May dreams of having Jeremy Corbyn refuse to allow her to go to the polls. Just think of it: an enemy of democracy.
That would hardly work though because May herself had consistently denied any intention to call an early election.
It would depend on circumstances. Not going opportunistically is one thing; seeking a dissolution because parliament was blocking a Brexit Bill to implement the referendum result (particularly if it was the Lords doing the blocking), is quite another.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Texas moved from a 16% difference between Romney and Obama in 2012 to less than 10% this year. It is going to become a battleground state in either 2020 or 2024.
Broadly speaking, gains and losses for Republicans and Democrats are cancelling each other out.
Twenty years ago, Bill Clinton carried Missouri, Tennessee, Louisiana, Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virginia, none of which are remotely close now.
Clinton specifically did well in the south because he was a southerner, ditto (I think) Jimmy Carter. Not sure if it has been a happy hunting ground for non-southern Democrats since Kennedy.
Bill Clinton and Carter did well in the South because that was before the final (and near total) realignment of the South from Dixiecrat to GOP. It is simply not worthwhile comparing current party performance with performance prior to that shift.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
Just looking through some of the data, if Trump is going to end all amnesties and turn back illegal immigration I think that puts Nevada into play for the GOP and takes Texas and Georgia off the endangered list for them. For the former even after all of those reports of record early votes, record Hispanic turnout Trump closed the margin for the GOP. It also puts Colorado into play IMO.
Also, Trump has pulled ahead of Romney in terms of the raw vote. This idea that he pulled in fewer voters than Romney should be consigned to the dustbin because it isn't true. If anything Trump should beat Romney quite handily even with Johnson eating into Trump's base in safe GOP states.
Eh. I don't know.
Me bringing it up officially makes it a cliche but demos in those states are still going to favor the Dems. There are going to be more Hispanic voters four years from now.
I'm not sure that there will be, the increasing demographics advantage relied on Clinton's 11m illegal immigrant amnesty in the border states. Without the amnesty, the process will be a lot slower. I remember a few liberal commentators saying that Texas would be ultra marginal because of it, how will the Dems make the gains without that massive increase in Hispanic voters.
Yeah, that's certainly possible.
Still, as a gut reaction, Texas wasn't a joke this year (as it usually is) and Arizona was relatively close (as it usually isn't.) I don;'t see this as the high tide for Hispanic vote for the Dems.
Maybe not the high water mark, but I think without the amnesty it becomes much more difficult for the Dems to benefit from the rising tides of demographics.
This is interesting on the Texan population and how it is changing.
The Clinton states plus Texas gets you to exactly 270 electoral college votes.
Provided none of them are lost. Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, and Nevada are all pretty tight.
Yes, Maine and Minnesota will turn red in 2020 if Trump does okay. Nevada will flip if the deportations are stepped up. I'm not sure about New Hampshire, it's a bit random.
I know Nevada pretty well, and I suspect that deportations will play a very minor role in deciding the election there. If the economy is flying four years from now, the republicans will take it. If, on the other hand, we're in recession it will stay democrat.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
The Parliament Act has no impact on whether Mrs May can call an election.
Are you perhaps thinking about the Fixed Term Parliament Act?
I've said it before I will say it again.
Theresa May dreams of having Jeremy Corbyn refuse to allow her to go to the polls. Just think of it: an enemy of democracy.
That would hardly work though because May herself had consistently denied any intention to call an early election.
But that would be before triggering Article 50 got looked at by the courts. An election to proceed with Article 50 and beyond is now a significant possibility - if the Supreme Court upholds.
This is a slur on Donald Trump who is only against illegal immigrants not against people of any particular race, although he mentions Mexican illegals in particular since they seem to be the biggest group.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
In the debate when they were asked what was the most important issue facing America - Hillary said Climate Change, Trump said Jobs for Americans.
That answer alone explains the backlash, along with the meaningless discussions about safe spaces and transgendered bathrooms which appear to have dominated the 'liberals' for the past year.
I'm pretty sure that's not true. Both candidates almost completely ignored the topic of climate change, despite the fact that is indeed one of the main issues facing not just America but the entire world.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
So long as Theresa May remains crap, Morris Dancers fails to grasp basic classical history knowledge, and we're not using AV, I don't have the energy to be relentless on other matters.
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
She cannot call one but she can force one by using the Tory majority to deliberately lose a vote of no confidence and then voting down any alternatives.
It's not a clean route and it's not without risk. The public might not like the game-playing and once you lose a VoNC, you lose some control over what happens next (which would be unchartered territory). All the same, it can be done.
Curiously, the FTPA doesn't allow for an election in the event that a government simply resigns and no replacement can be found. The clock would tick from when the first VoNC in a new government is passed.
Surely somebody would be invited to 'try' to form a Government which would then need an affirmative Confidence Vote in the Commons.Some argue that would be someone other than May - who had just lost a No Confidence Vote. Effectively a new Government would be formed awaiting affirmation by the Legislature. For an Affirmation Vote to take place there would have to be a Government in existence to vote for or against!
Not necessarily, though it couldn't be ruled out. That would be the risk.
Were May to lose a VoNC (deliberately), she could seek to stay on pending someone else being invited to form a government. That might work; it might not.
The Queen might invite Corbyn as LotO to try. However, even if she did, Corbyn might refuse on the grounds that he clearly could not command the confidence of the House. Alternatively, the Queen might not even ask him on the same basis. FWIW, I think she would, simply because it would keep her above politics for him to refuse / fail, even if that outcome were inevitable. However, if he did accept and put it to the Commons then yes, he would have to be appointed PM, even if only briefly.
The better option if parliament were being unreasonably obstructionist would first be to put down a motion in the Commons for an early election and then to challenge Labour to vote against it.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
This is encouraging from Djisselbloem, even if it was said in criticism of Boris:
"There is no win-win situation. It's going to be a lose-lose situation and in the best case if we set aside all emotions and try to reach an agreement that is least damaging to both of us we can minimise the damages"
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Bush senior.
We are in completely uncharted territory with Trump. This will be a presidency like no other. making predictions about his re-election before he has even taken office does seem a touch speculative.
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Ford. And Bush-41.
Ford wasn't really a second term, though. He wasn't on either the top nor the bottom of the ticket.
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
He would certainly have brought in more African American voters, while the anti-Hillary vote would have been neutered.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Ford. And Bush-41.
Both preceeded by their own party.
Carter is the only potential modern day analogue I can find to Trump.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Bush senior.
We are in completely uncharted territory with Trump. This will be a presidency like no other. making predictions about his re-election before he has even taken office does seem a touch speculative.
Not quite like no other. There are strong elements of Andrew Jackson about him.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
If the left hadn't been overreacting to everything under the sun for the last 10 years then I don't think Trump would even be on the ballot, he's as much a reaction to globalisation as he is a reaction to overly-PC lefties. The guy mentioned is clearly a racist arsehole, but there have been so many cases where it wasn't and the left had hysterical reactions. Freddie Gray getting blamed on whites was my favourite, black police officers in a black city with a black mayor and black police chief kill a black man and it gets blamed on whites.
In the debate when they were asked what was the most important issue facing America - Hillary said Climate Change, Trump said Jobs for Americans.
That answer alone explains the backlash, along with the meaningless discussions about safe spaces and transgendered bathrooms which appear to have dominated the 'liberals' for the past year.
I'm pretty sure that's not true. Both candidates almost completely ignored the topic of climate change, despite the fact that is indeed one of the main issues facing not just America but the entire world.
Even if it is one of the main issues facing the world, it is not one of the main issues faced by individuals in their daily lives. Big difference in terms of impact on elections.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Ford. And Bush-41.
Both preceeded by their own party.
Carter is the only potential modern day analogue I can find to Trump.
In that sense, yes. In others, quite a long way off.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Bush senior.
We are in completely uncharted territory with Trump. This will be a presidency like no other. making predictions about his re-election before he has even taken office does seem a touch speculative.
Not quite like no other. There are strong elements of Andrew Jackson about him.
I'm tempted to a thread along those lines.
I'm also thinking there's an element of Ulysses S. Grant about Trump
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
I can't believe Obama would not have won a third term if it were an option. For one thing, he would have been far more vital in his second term, rather than spending several years as a lame duck President.
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
So long as Theresa May remains crap, Morris Dancers fails to grasp basic classical history knowledge, and we're not using AV, I don't have the energy to be relentless on other matters.
TICIPM?
TICIPMFALACILL
Theresa Is Crap Is Prime Minister For As Long As Corbyn Is Labour Leader
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
So long as Theresa May remains crap, Morris Dancers fails to grasp basic classical history knowledge, and we're not using AV, I don't have the energy to be relentless on other matters.
TICIPM?
TICIPMFALACILL
Theresa Is Crap Is Prime Minister For As Long As Corbyn Is Labour Leader
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
So long as Theresa May remains crap, Morris Dancers fails to grasp basic classical history knowledge, and we're not using AV, I don't have the energy to be relentless on other matters.
TICIPM?
TICIPMFALACILL
Theresa Is Crap Is Prime Minister For As Long As Corbyn Is Labour Leader
Silly TSE, as long as he doesn't say the N word it's not racist. there is only a very, very narrowly defined list of phrase that are genuinely 100% authentically racists/sexist/homophobic everything else is wet left liberal over reaction safe space.
What he said was wrong, and he will pay the price. But does it really add anything to this site and the political debate to post such stuff?
Or do we need to balance it by posting tweets about the people who have lost their jobs because of the death threats they have made towards Trump? There has been a few of those too over the last few days.
It is pointless and silly to dig up the behaviour of a few individuals and extrapolate from that that Trump supporters are racist, or that Democrats are plotting murder.
Sorry did my post violate your safe space? Should I place trigger warnings in future?
Just make sure you don't get as bad as 619's relentless bombardment of tweets on here.
So long as Theresa May remains crap, Morris Dancers fails to grasp basic classical history knowledge, and we're not using AV, I don't have the energy to be relentless on other matters.
TICIPM?
TICIPMFALACILL
Theresa Is Crap Is Prime Minister For As Long As Corbyn Is Labour Leader
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
I can't believe Obama would not have won a third term if it were an option. For one thing, he would have been far more vital in his second term, rather than spending several years as a lame duck President.
His golf handicap might have suffered, mind.
This is the Obama who won by a margin of just 3.86% at the height of his powers in 2012, against Mighty Mitt Romney?
The Hoff is awesome, forget Ronald Reagan, The Berlin Wall came down thanks to the Hoff.
One of my favourite nightclubs was Reflex Bar in Liverpool, it played 80s pop music, and they had a giant life sized photo of the Hoff in his speedos on the wall. It was awesome.
The Hoff is awesome, forget Ronald Reagan, The Berlin Wall came down thanks to the Hoff.
One of my favourite nightclubs was Reflex Bar in Liverpool, it played 80s pop music, and they had a giant life sized photo of the Hoff in his speedos on the wall. It was awesome.
Voters overwhelmingly want Britain to remain in the EU single market after Brexit but would also like to see controls on immigration, according to a study that suggests Theresa May faces a tough political challenge in reconciling public expectations.
Extensive polling carried out by NatCen, the independent social research agency, and overseen by the elections expert John Curtice suggests 90% of people favour remaining in the single market, regardless of how they voted in the referendum.
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
I can't believe Obama would not have won a third term if it were an option. For one thing, he would have been far more vital in his second term, rather than spending several years as a lame duck President.
His golf handicap might have suffered, mind.
This is the Obama who won by a margin of just 3.86% at the height of his powers in 2012, against Mighty Mitt Romney?
Trump v Obama would not have been Trump v Clinton..... one Democrat is a trusted two-term President with very high favorability ratings, the other seen by many as a hated harpie with huge public trust issues....
Clinton lost it for the Democrats, rather than Trump winning it for the Republicans.
The Hoff is awesome, forget Ronald Reagan, The Berlin Wall came down thanks to the Hoff.
One of my favourite nightclubs was Reflex Bar in Liverpool, it played 80s pop music, and they had a giant life sized photo of the Hoff in his speedos on the wall. It was awesome.
Speaking to a few Dems, they think they don't have anyone who can beat Trump in 2020. No congressperson, Senator or Governor sticks out to them as someone who can beat Trump. They all want Obama back. Desperately.
If the Democrats can't find a better candidate by 2020 they might as well shut up shop. Your party is in deep trouble if beating Trump looks challenging to you.
This is what I was talking about earlier, no new net Hispanic voters, returning GOP traditionalists and the possibility of a fast growing economy on the back of a mega fiscal stimulus. There is no Dem candidate who can defeat all of those shifts away.
Presidents normally win a second term if they run for it. Carter is the exception that proves the rule.
And Bush senior.
We are in completely uncharted territory with Trump. This will be a presidency like no other. making predictions about his re-election before he has even taken office does seem a touch speculative.
Not quite like no other. There are strong elements of Andrew Jackson about him.
I'm tempted to a thread along those lines.
I'm also thinking there's an element of Ulysses S. Grant about Trump
Grant did invent total war in the military conflict. Trump has brought total war to US politics.
"Calenda, a former Italian envoy to Brussels, said: “There’s lots of chaos and we don’t understand what the position is. It’s all becoming an internal UK debate, which is not OK. The British government needs to sit down, put its cards on the table and negotiate.”"
I thought we couldn't do that until A50 had been declared
Carlo Calenda, an Italian economics minister, said....“You can’t say that it’s sensible to say we want access to the single market but no free circulation of people. It’s obvious that doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.”
Carlo Calenda, an Italian economics minister, said....“You can’t say that it’s sensible to say we want access to the single market but no free circulation of people. It’s obvious that doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.”
Er...why? Not at all obvious, mi ol' china.
I think he may need reprogramming by Frau Merkel.
lol.. "it's obvious that doesn't make any sense whatsoever"
Obama's favourables are excellent, and he would have carried NC and FL.
Assuming Obama was eligible for a third term and the Sanders phenomenon had still happened, I wonder if Clinton would have helped push him across the line to get revenge for Obama's 2008 run against her.
Indeed. And who cares what various Europeans claim is 'possible' and 'not possible' at this stage. It's all just posturing until the conference room doors get closed ...
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
I can't believe Obama would not have won a third term if it were an option. For one thing, he would have been far more vital in his second term, rather than spending several years as a lame duck President.
His golf handicap might have suffered, mind.
he connected with working class white midwesterners in a way Hillary just couldn't......
Anyway, time for me to go. In case anyone missed it (and the Trump-speak) earlier, here's a repost FPT:
Great news, people. The best news. I've written a book, and it's so good, so good. You're gonna love it. It has the best words. I have the best words because I'm a great author. We're making fantasy great again, people.
Edited extra bit: ahem, forgot the slightly more serious concise description.
It's Kingdom Asunder, the first part of a fantasy trilogy, up for pre-order (out 24 November). Lower price applies from now until 8 December. [Correction, until 2 December, sorry].
It's crammed full of ruthless she-wolves, scheming traitors, and grim knights. Fun for all the family [in seriousness, it isn't. Like knife-wrench, it's not for kids].
2 lines too many - however for many companies the knowledge that there is part of the Government website designed to encourage growth for businesses may well come as a surprise.
No doubt it will be the first part pulled down if Corbyn Labour ever get into power.
Obama's favourables are excellent, and he would have carried NC and FL.
PA, MI and WI as well.
Ohio to Trump,
Iowa would have been interesting - Obama won it "despite" the demographics there.
PA, MI and WI would be interesting too. Those are the areas where Trump running against Clinton as continuity Obama had the most purchase, and Obama wouldn't have been able to backtrack on TPP in the way Clinton did. He's a stronger campaigner but would still have been in trouble. Trump could have exposed Obama's haughtiness in a way Mitt Romney never could.
Nah. Obama would probably have won a third term. Much better favourability ratings than Hillary and he's a much better campaigner than her too. His ratings would probably have suffered in a campaign as against what they are now but given how close it ultimately was, I think he'd have come through.
I can't believe Obama would not have won a third term if it were an option. For one thing, he would have been far more vital in his second term, rather than spending several years as a lame duck President.
His golf handicap might have suffered, mind.
he connected with working class white midwesterners in a way Hillary just couldn't......
No, it was all about race. Those voters who went for Obama in 08 and 12, and would have done in 16 are one dimensional racists now.
Yeah, that is a bit cheap from Greening. A two second google search revealed the district was in the Philippines.
A two-second Google should have been done then by the person asking the question. No minister should be expected to have to second guess Diane Abbot's mistakes...
This is encouraging from Djisselbloem, even if it was said in criticism of Boris:
"There is no win-win situation. It's going to be a lose-lose situation and in the best case if we set aside all emotions and try to reach an agreement that is least damaging to both of us we can minimise the damages"
The difficulty for the UK government, though, is accepting they are in damage limitation mode on Brexit. They are very heavily invested in the rhetoric.
ScreamingEagles: Mrs May cannot call an election, The Parliament Act rules.
She cannot call one but she can force one by using the Tory majority to deliberately lose a vote of no confidence and then voting down any alternatives.
It's not a clean route and it's not without risk. The public might not like the game-playing and once you lose a VoNC, you lose some control over what happens next (which would be unchartered territory). All the same, it can be done.
Curiously, the FTPA doesn't allow for an election in the event that a government simply resigns and no replacement can be found. The clock would tick from when the first VoNC in a new government is passed.
Surely somebody would be invited to 'try' to form a Government which would then need an affirmative Confidence Vote in the Commons.Some argue that would be someone other than May - who had just lost a No Confidence Vote. Effectively a new Government would be formed awaiting affirmation by the Legislature. For an Affirmation Vote to take place there would have to be a Government in existence to vote for or against!
Not necessarily, though it couldn't be ruled out. That would be the risk.
Were May to lose a VoNC (deliberately), she could seek to stay on pending someone else being invited to form a government. That might work; it might not.
The Queen might invite Corbyn as LotO to try. However, even if she did, Corbyn might refuse on the grounds that he clearly could not command the confidence of the House. Alternatively, the Queen might not even ask him on the same basis. FWIW, I think she would, simply because it would keep her above politics for him to refuse / fail, even if that outcome were inevitable. However, if he did accept and put it to the Commons then yes, he would have to be appointed PM, even if only briefly.
The better option if parliament were being unreasonably obstructionist would first be to put down a motion in the Commons for an early election and then to challenge Labour to vote against it.
But if Corbyn accepted, his Government would surely have to exist before an Affirmative Confidence Vote could take place? The Commons could hardly vote for or against a Phantom Government! On that basis he would already be PM and would require the Affirmative vote to continue. On his being denied the Confidence of the House a Dissolution would follow. By the way, I can see no reason why Corbyn would not 'try' after being invited.
Comments
I think Obama would have won in 2012, just.
Obama 2008 and Trump 2016 elections.
This is a slur on Donald Trump who is only against illegal immigrants not against people of any particular race, although he mentions Mexican illegals in particular since they seem to be the biggest group.
Were May to lose a VoNC (deliberately), she could seek to stay on pending someone else being invited to form a government. That might work; it might not.
The Queen might invite Corbyn as LotO to try. However, even if she did, Corbyn might refuse on the grounds that he clearly could not command the confidence of the House. Alternatively, the Queen might not even ask him on the same basis. FWIW, I think she would, simply because it would keep her above politics for him to refuse / fail, even if that outcome were inevitable. However, if he did accept and put it to the Commons then yes, he would have to be appointed PM, even if only briefly.
The better option if parliament were being unreasonably obstructionist would first be to put down a motion in the Commons for an early election and then to challenge Labour to vote against it.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-national-infrastructure-commissions-interim-report-into-the-cambridge-milton-keynes-oxford-corridor
"There is no win-win situation. It's going to be a lose-lose situation and in the best case if we set aside all emotions and try to reach an agreement that is least damaging to both of us we can minimise the damages"
We are in completely uncharted territory with Trump. This will be a presidency like no other. making predictions about his re-election before he has even taken office does seem a touch speculative.
Carter is the only potential modern day analogue I can find to Trump.
http://mashable.com/2016/11/15/ceo-fired-trump-facebook-threat/#ZyB9SABoGEqx
Facebook post: "I'm going to kill the president. Elect. Bring it Secret Service."
Unsurprisingly, he got a not-very-friendly visit from the Secret Service, and has lost his job.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/residents-of-manhattan-apartment-complex-vote-trump-name-off-buildings-2016-11-15
I'm also thinking there's an element of Ulysses S. Grant about Trump
His golf handicap might have suffered, mind.
Theresa Is Crap Is Prime Minister For As Long As Corbyn Is Labour Leader
But Tezza can't tell the HoC anything...
https://twitter.com/rowenamason/status/798911364811132928
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAf-3tJfIsM
I'm at the anger/bargaining stage when it comes to Dave going and Osborne being purged though.
Must try harder....
One of my favourite nightclubs was Reflex Bar in Liverpool, it played 80s pop music, and they had a giant life sized photo of the Hoff in his speedos on the wall. It was awesome.
Voters overwhelmingly want Britain to remain in the EU single market after Brexit but would also like to see controls on immigration, according to a study that suggests Theresa May faces a tough political challenge in reconciling public expectations.
Extensive polling carried out by NatCen, the independent social research agency, and overseen by the elections expert John Curtice suggests 90% of people favour remaining in the single market, regardless of how they voted in the referendum.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/16/uk-voters-want-single-market-access-and-immigration-controls-poll-finds?CMP=twt_a-politics_b-gdnukpolitics
Clinton lost it for the Democrats, rather than Trump winning it for the Republicans.
Oops! That was Sherman.
I thought we couldn't do that until A50 had been declared
Translation: Italians are worried.
Er...why? Not at all obvious, mi ol' china.
I think he may need reprogramming by Frau Merkel.
SNP MP Faces Probe Over £88,000 Taxpayers' Cash Paid to Her Company https://t.co/aoLUYq2VeE https://t.co/NpNyiOgnnV
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2016-06-24/41141/
Well maybe, if Osborne becomes PM, I'd urge him to act like Caesar and parade his opponents around like Vercingetorix.
http://order-order.com/2016/11/16/tory-candidate-seeking-injunction-mep-dispute/
Iowa would have been interesting - Obama won it "despite" the demographics there.
Great news, people. The best news. I've written a book, and it's so good, so good. You're gonna love it. It has the best words. I have the best words because I'm a great author. We're making fantasy great again, people.
Amazon US - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N8UF799/
Amazon UK - https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N8UF799/
Kobo - https://store.kobobooks.com/en-ca/ebook/kingdom-asunder-the-bloody-crown-trilogy-volume-one
Barnes & Noble - http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/books/1125052815?ean=2940153811246
Edited extra bit: ahem, forgot the slightly more serious concise description.
It's Kingdom Asunder, the first part of a fantasy trilogy, up for pre-order (out 24 November). Lower price applies from now until 8 December. [Correction, until 2 December, sorry].
It's crammed full of ruthless she-wolves, scheming traitors, and grim knights. Fun for all the family [in seriousness, it isn't. Like knife-wrench, it's not for kids].
No doubt it will be the first part pulled down if
CorbynLabour ever get into power.https://twitter.com/OvertonMarianne/status/798949066822602752
FYI - Ms Overton has stood twice at general elections in this constituency, keeping her deposit each time.
By the way, I can see no reason why Corbyn would not 'try' after being invited.