So I wonder then about the reports from BBC journalists on this suggesting there is perhaps more than one incident, more than one compromising situation.
What if its more, not just about his leisure activities. Just, more.
The original report was commissioned and paid for by political opponents of Trump in the US. If Christopher Steele went around his contacts offering money for information about whether they had compromising material on Trump and whether Trump was working for them, it seems self-evident that he will be able to find people who, for whatever reason, will say 'yes' and who will also have access to enough other relevant information to piece together a story that is superficially plausible. I think MonikerDiCanio has him bang to rights.
Lets call a spade a spade, Trump could piss on your loved ones in front of you and you'd still call it fake.
Intelligence agencies have been aware of possible issues with Trump and the Russians for YEARS. Steele's report was part triggered for commissioning because US agencies warned the GOP that Trump might have some significant difficulties as a candidate.
I know this post is from yesterday but the bit in bold is so applicable to significant sections on this site that it's unreal.
Trump is clearly a disaster waiting to happen, that being the case why was all this juicy material not highlighted at some length by the (largely) hostile media ? Instead we had to put up with all sorts of tendentious bullshit concerning what he may or may not have said a couple of decades ago, which was clearly never going to slow him down.
Maybe they (the media) don't have access to that material right now. It looks like its intelligence services which have got the major info on Trump and his dealings from Y0kel's posts.
Also agree with Pong from the last thread re. Obama. Just just as Dubya essentially made Bill Clinton look amazing, Trump will do the same to Obama. The man is a disaster waiting to happen, and it's telling that (outside of PB) so many across the political spectrum think this.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
@christopherhope: Jeremy Corbyn backed decommissioning ALL nuclear power stations, new recording reveals @BBCr4today
And among Unite members. Len McCluskey's man not only wants to make thousands of Unite members in the energy industry redundant, but also thousands more in the defence industry.
Great, the Conservatives should be going for it. I don't necessarily think they should be considered favourites, but that's besides the point. Throw the kitchen sink at it and hope Labour implodes. Which...
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
Someone on the radio yesterday, I think it was Nick Cohen??? pointed out that Corbyn and his mates are against lots of things, but when it comes to formulating an actual policy, they are unable and unwilling to formulate it. Its easier to be against something than do something about it.
Yep. But then they voted for Dubya (at least once, anyway). So I'm not surprised that Americans would vote Trump. At least most of their electorate didn't for vote him and actually voted for Hillary. Watching one of Rachel Maddow's history lessons (who btw seriously owned Kellyanne Conway a few weeks ago) the last time this situation (the big gap between the electoral college and the popular vote) occured was during the Reconstruction era....
Someone on the radio yesterday, I think it was Nick Cohen??? pointed out that Corbyn and his mates are against lots of things, but when it comes to formulating an actual policy, they are unable and unwilling to formulate it. Its easier to be against something than do something about it.
That's pretty much true of any party. The moment you formulate a policy, it will have holes in it. That's true of any policy - the key issue is how much the policy gets inspected and how much publicity the holes get.
@christopherhope: Jeremy Corbyn backed decommissioning ALL nuclear power stations, new recording reveals @BBCr4today
That's another Tory poster for Copeland, to add to all the others. Jamie Reed messed up by giving notice of his resignation.
I doubt Reed would mind Corbyn getting a kicking in Copeland.
That said Labour will win (I think)
UKIP definitely won't - thats the basis of my betting anyway.
I agree it's a Lab/Con seat. Tories are leafleting hard, see they've a good chance to win a by-election in government for the first time in three decades.
Someone on the radio yesterday, I think it was Nick Cohen??? pointed out that Corbyn and his mates are against lots of things, but when it comes to formulating an actual policy, they are unable and unwilling to formulate it. Its easier to be against something than do something about it.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
That is an extraordinary interview with Cooper. She flatly lies continuously. It really is post-truth time.
Health costs are rising because the population is ageing. In other words, they are rising because people are taking better care of themselves, not worse.
I think they're rising because the NHS keeps alive to 65-80 some people who in the past would have died 8-10 years earlier of complications of diabetes, etc.
A determined public health programme to rid peoples' diets of junk food would prevent most of the sad cases - foot and leg amputations - featured in the BBC programme on type 2 diabetes. That failure to prevent disease is costing the NHS/taxpayers about £12bn per year.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
The reputational damage to the US from Trumps presidency will be enormous. It used to be considered an accolade having the POTUS visit your country. Now it will be something to be avoided at all costs. There was also a certain reverence from the foreign press....
.....a visit to Buckingham Palace would be a hoot!.
.....I'd be very surprised if he lasts the four years.
Yep. But then they voted for Dubya (at least once, anyway). So I'm not surprised that Americans would vote Trump. At least most of their electorate didn't for vote him and actually voted for Hillary. Watching one of Rachel Maddow's history lessons (who btw seriously owned Kellyanne Conway a few weeks ago) the last time this situation (the gap between the electoral college and the popular vote) occured was during the Reconstruction era....
True enough. Too many American seem to labour under the misapprehension that they vote for their president. The states elect the president. They select electors in accordance with their own constitutions. If California changed its constitution to say it would not hold an election and would alway send electors what supported the Democratic candidate, that would be completely lawful.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
What I'm interested in is how the Trump supporters who aren't total hardcores for him react in the next four years. Saw a facebook screenshot of a guy celebrating 'Obamacare' ending. He said he'd be okay because he's on the Affordable Care Act. He didn't realise that Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the SAME THING. When others on his facebook pointed this out to him, well....he didn't respond. Also I couldn't believe mt eyes seeing some Trumpers worried about losing parts of their Obamacare on CNN. It's like didn't you see the election? Don't you know the GOP's position on Obamacare?
NHS demand is growing at 4% a year, the economy at 2%. This type of crisis will continue as long as a proper funding settlement is not reached. And no it's not all because of European immigration
People have to start taking more responsibility for their own health instead of outsourcing it to the A&E department.
In particular prevent poor health by avoiding smoking and excessive drinking; taking regular exercise; eat more fruit and veg.
Don't expect to indulge and that the NHS can make everything right again.
" taking regular exercise"
So far this year I've walked or run 120 miles, mainly by going out for an hour or more most mornings and evenings. That's about eleven miles a day.
And my f'ing fitness tracker still says: "could do better"
I'm looking after a toddler, you useless piece of electronic dross. How the f'ing 'eck do you expect me to do 'better'? And what does 'better' even mean?
(Throws mobile and watch into bin)
Before I damaged my leg, I was doing really well with weight loss. But it required herculean efforts to lose that weight. I was walking a minimum of 12 miles a day (max ~ 28) , and rowing 10km. It's hard to shift the middle aged spread - not that I imagine you're anywhere near my age!
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
That is an extraordinary interview with Cooper. She flatly lies continuously. It really is post-truth time.
That's the average Kellyanne Conway interview. Most of Trump's transition team/surrogates flat out lie when being interviewed. It's why it's so easy for the likes of Robert Reich to make Jeffery Lord looks stupid on CNN for example. It doesn't help that Trump's now got Rick Santorum Trumping for him all across the news networks.
Someone on the radio yesterday, I think it was Nick Cohen??? pointed out that Corbyn and his mates are against lots of things, but when it comes to formulating an actual policy, they are unable and unwilling to formulate it. Its easier to be against something than do something about it.
That's pretty much true of any party. The moment you formulate a policy, it will have holes in it. That's true of any policy - the key issue is how much the policy gets inspected and how much publicity the holes get.
An often forgotten aspect of the Brown/Blair/Mandelson triumvirate was they would spend months bullet-proofing every policy in run-up to '97.
NHS demand is growing at 4% a year, the economy at 2%. This type of crisis will continue as long as a proper funding settlement is not reached. And no it's not all because of European immigration
Are you able to help me with a question. We get comparisons on spending as between different countries but do other countries have a a greater mix of public/private health spending constituting their total spend? In short, am I asking does our look low because it's in effect more reliant on tax proceeds recycling? I've looked but the data seems to be based on GDP and spending not government budgets and spending. Roughly 20% of each annual budget goes to health - is this high or low and is there an upper limit.
If government spending is heading towards 50% on pensions and health what's left for the young?
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
What I'm interested in is how the Trump supporters who aren't total hardcores for him react in the next four years. Saw a facebook screenshot of a guy celebrating 'Obamacare' ending. He said he'd be okay because he's on the Affordable Care Act. He didn't realise that Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act are the SAME THING. When others on his facebook pointed this out to him, well....he didn't respond. Also I couldn't believe mt eyes seeing some Trumpers worried about losing parts of their Obamacare on CNN. It's like didn't you see the election? Don't you know the GOP's position on Obamacare?
@christopherhope: Jeremy Corbyn backed decommissioning ALL nuclear power stations, new recording reveals @BBCr4today
That's another Tory poster for Copeland, to add to all the others. Jamie Reed messed up by giving notice of his resignation.
I doubt Reed would mind Corbyn getting a kicking in Copeland.
That said Labour will win (I think)
UKIP definitely won't - thats the basis of my betting anyway.
I agree it's a Lab/Con seat. Tories are leafleting hard, see they've a good chance to win a by-election in government for the first time in three decades.
Though that stat shows just how hard it is for governments to gain seats (note that while it'd be the first Con gain in govt for 35 years, it'd also be the first gain by *any* party in government since that same election; Labour has not gained a seat while in government since the rather odd Liverpool Scotland by-election in 1929).
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
I think it'd knock him for a bit, but not much. The credibility of the intelligence services and MSM is pretty low in the USA.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true.
It's paid for GOP/Dems oppo research who hated Trump, handed to the FBI by McCain who hates Trump, supposedly leaked by CIA who much prefer Hillary, appears on Buzzfeed who hate Trump - pushed by CNN who hate Trump and on and on and on.
I said yesterday I thought it was complete tripe - I haven't changed my mind. It's just beyond credible. Next someone will claim to have seen Trump at a neo-Nazi rally last week. The lack of objectivity has killed the MSM here and in the US. Today's Times is one long fest of anti-Trumpism again. I shouldn't be able to guess the reporting of a story before I read it in a supposedly neutral publication. Trump was spot on about the BBC too.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
The reputational damage to the US from Trumps presidency will be enormous. It used to be considered an accolade having the POTUS visit your country. Now it will be something to be avoided at all costs. There was also a certain reverence from the foreign press....
.....a visit to Buckingham Palace would be a hoot!.
.....I'd be very surprised if he lasts the four years.
and I also think Trump's election will reinforce the idea in Chinese leadership that democracy is a really bad system that doesn't allow proper long term planning of a country/economy. They must be bewildered at events.
I see that Jezza's relaunch has moved on to defence policy. All looks to be going well.
I've truly no idea what Labour's policy is on anything now. I caught the tail-end of a report about him disagreeing with his own Defence bod. I just view Labour as a Generation Game conveyor belt of amusement. I'm waiting for the cuddly toy...
First sign of that humongous climbdown. Paul Givan has found his £50k to fund the Irish Language Liofa programme down the back of his sofa. There's a container of fudge heading to Stormont. Will it get there by Monday?
The DUP would remain the largest party in a smaller assembly. The big losers (as you would expect in a shrinking assembly) are smaller parties - the UUP and the SDLP particularly - with the conspicuous exception of the Alliance who would gain ground relatively.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
The reputational damage to the US from Trumps presidency will be enormous. It used to be considered an accolade having the POTUS visit your country. Now it will be something to be avoided at all costs. There was also a certain reverence from the foreign press....
.....a visit to Buckingham Palace would be a hoot!.
.....I'd be very surprised if he lasts the four years.
and I also think Trump's election will reinforce the idea in Chinese leadership that democracy is a really bad system that doesn't allow proper long term planning of a country/economy. They must be bewildered at events.
That is hardly necessary, China is currently getting much more authoritarian and repressive not less, and has been since President Xi has been in the driving seat.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
Clinical insanity is a constitutional cause for removal from office under the 25th Amendment, which while it ultimately requires the same 2/3rds majority as impeachment if Trump wanted to contest the declaration that he was medically unfit, is a much quicker route to removing him than full impeachment hearings. It also has the advantage to those with this end in mind, of removing the powers of the presidency from him in the interim (which impeachment doesn't). Such a move would require Pence's assent. Those thinking of betting on Trump's removal from office within the first term / first year / whenever ought to consider the scenario because although it would remove the powers of office from him, he would formally remain President with Pence only becoming Acting President; it's a regency, not a dethronement.
The DUP would remain the largest party in a smaller assembly. The big losers (as you would expect in a shrinking assembly) are smaller parties - the UUP and the SDLP particularly - with the conspicuous exception of the Alliance who would gain ground relatively.
A result effectively guaranteeing the existing power-sharing arrangement.
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
I think it'd knock him for a bit, but not much. The credibility of the intelligence services and MSM is pretty low in the USA.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true.
It's paid for GOP/Dems oppo research who hated Trump, handed to the FBI by McCain who hates Trump, supposedly leaked by CIA who much prefer Hillary, appears on Buzzfeed who hate Trump - pushed by CNN who hate Trump and on and on and on.
I said yesterday I thought it was complete tripe - I haven't changed my mind. It's just beyond credible. Next someone will claim to have seen Trump at a neo-Nazi rally last week. The lack of objectivity has killed the MSM here and in the US. Today's Times is one long fest of anti-Trumpism again. I shouldn't be able to guess the reporting of a story before I read it in a supposedly neutral publication. Trump was spot on about the BBC too.
It's things like this which undermine the media's credibility.
They've had years of not really doing much journalism bar reporting their mates PR releases.
I was listening to a programme on R4 with some media types yesterday afternoon with one editor saying in London they were all 100% for staying in and chose to ignore their reporters who went out into the sticks and came back saying they could hardly find any remainers. The reports didnt fit the story so were passed over.
Until the media get back to balanced reporting they're a spent force.
Macron v Le Pen in round 2 would be the most fascinating result. It would be a true demonstration of the new 'open/closed' axis replacing the traditional left/right one.
Looks like Mrs May is throwing the kitchen sink at Copeland and making it all about Corbyn
Excellent news for those of us betting on a Tory gain. She needs to be careful though. What does she wanna do, actually bring the guy down?
She should. It'd sharpen up the Tory game, which otherwise risks drifting and engaging in internal spats over Brexit, only to be surprised when Labour dumps Corbyn in 2019 anyway.
The DUP would remain the largest party in a smaller assembly. The big losers (as you would expect in a shrinking assembly) are smaller parties - the UUP and the SDLP particularly - with the conspicuous exception of the Alliance who would gain ground relatively.
A result effectively guaranteeing the existing power-sharing arrangement.
Can that work though? If the current arrangement has fallen apart and the parties can't work together, then an election might not solve that problem.
I had assumed that we would be in for a very rough ride, but that Trump would make the 4 years. After watching the press conference on news last night it is very difficult not to come to the same conclusion as Dan Hodges: Trump is clinically insane.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
Clinical insanity is a constitutional cause for removal from office under the 25th Amendment, which while it ultimately requires the same 2/3rds majority as impeachment if Trump wanted to contest the declaration that he was medically unfit, is a much quicker route to removing him than full impeachment hearings. It also has the advantage to those with this end in mind, of removing the powers of the presidency from him in the interim (which impeachment doesn't). Such a move would require Pence's assent. Those thinking of betting on Trump's removal from office within the first term / first year / whenever ought to consider the scenario because although it would remove the powers of office from him, he would formally remain President with Pence only becoming Acting President; it's a regency, not a dethronement.
The question is would Trump haters hate Pence even more ? Trump might be nuts, but he is by instinct a New York liberal on social matters, Pence not so much. People might want to consider the sort of people Pence would nominate for the various government offices...
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
@christopherhope: Jeremy Corbyn backed decommissioning ALL nuclear power stations, new recording reveals @BBCr4today
That's another Tory poster for Copeland, to add to all the others. Jamie Reed messed up by giving notice of his resignation.
I doubt Reed would mind Corbyn getting a kicking in Copeland.
That said Labour will win (I think)
UKIP definitely won't - thats the basis of my betting anyway.
I agree it's a Lab/Con seat. Tories are leafleting hard, see they've a good chance to win a by-election in government for the first time in three decades.
Though that stat shows just how hard it is for governments to gain seats (note that while it'd be the first Con gain in govt for 35 years, it'd also be the first gain by *any* party in government since that same election; Labour has not gained a seat while in government since the rather odd Liverpool Scotland by-election in 1929).
Clearly, it will be close. What makes me slightly favour the Tories in Copeland is that there seems to be a viable successor seat for a Tory Copeland MP (the successor Barrow seat incorporates parts of Copeland and is notionally Tory).
The Labour MP for Copeland has no real future, as the Whitehaven & Workington seat seems spoken for by the current Labour MP for Workington. So, it is a long slog of a campaign for 3 years max as an MP.
That might make the Tory candidate & campaign slightly more energized.
The DUP would remain the largest party in a smaller assembly. The big losers (as you would expect in a shrinking assembly) are smaller parties - the UUP and the SDLP particularly - with the conspicuous exception of the Alliance who would gain ground relatively.
assuming of course anyone can be arsed to walk to a freezing cold polling station in the shit driving rain.
luckily NI has RHI they'll be needing the heat to warm themselves up when they get home
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
I think it'd knock him for a bit, but not much. The credibility of the intelligence services and MSM is pretty low in the USA.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true.
It's paid for GOP/Dems oppo research who hated Trump, handed to the FBI by McCain who hates Trump, supposedly leaked by CIA who much prefer Hillary, appears on Buzzfeed who hate Trump - pushed by CNN who hate Trump and on and on and on.
I said yesterday I thought it was complete tripe - I haven't changed my mind. It's just beyond credible. Next someone will claim to have seen Trump at a neo-Nazi rally last week. The lack of objectivity has killed the MSM here and in the US. Today's Times is one long fest of anti-Trumpism again. I shouldn't be able to guess the reporting of a story before I read it in a supposedly neutral publication. Trump was spot on about the BBC too.
"Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true."
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
In the good old days reporters would tell the viewers it was a flat out lie, they would have enough credibility with the public that they would be believed over the politician, think Brian Waldron or Robin Day. The problem these days is that interviewers political agendas are usually obvious, and they pedal so much flim-flam and bullshit that the public doesn't give them any more respect than the politician.
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
You might as well ask a Branch Davidian what they thought of David Koresh.
First sign of that humongous climbdown. Paul Givan has found his £50k to fund the Irish Language Liofa programme down the back of his sofa. There's a container of fudge heading to Stormont. Will it get there by Monday?
I read his tweet, might the money be better spent on basic numeracy for the DUP ?
Someone on the radio yesterday, I think it was Nick Cohen??? pointed out that Corbyn and his mates are against lots of things, but when it comes to formulating an actual policy, they are unable and unwilling to formulate it. Its easier to be against something than do something about it.
History of leftist politics since the year dot.
History of all opposition parties. Opposition is mostly about scrutiny of the governing party's policies and actions.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
And you clearly detest him and want to believe anything that confirms it - you have repeatedly called him a white supremacist. I can't take your views on him seriously.
We're all biased in opinions, I happen to think he's won the POTUS race from nowhere and become a billionaire/media star/pushed major corps into u-turns because he's very smart.
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
You might as well ask a Branch Davidian what they thought of David Koresh.
LMAO. Plato has gone from thinking the Times are brilliant to hating them because they aren't Trumping for Trump.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
I thought the interview dull -- two people shouting at each other over largely technicalities.
What will matter is whether there is any credible evidence to back the story up. If it is shown to be largely lies, then CNN will suffer repetitional damage whether or not they formally linked to the Buzzfeed article.
From the evidence I have seen, I am pretty unpersuaded that the story is true (and I think Trump is a monster).
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
I think it'd knock him for a bit, but not much. The credibility of the intelligence services and MSM is pretty low in the USA.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true.
It's paid for GOP/Dems oppo research who hated Trump, handed to the FBI by McCain who hates Trump, supposedly leaked by CIA who much prefer Hillary, appears on Buzzfeed who hate Trump - pushed by CNN who hate Trump and on and on and on.
I said yesterday I thought it was complete tripe - I haven't changed my mind. It's just beyond credible. Next someone will claim to have seen Trump at a neo-Nazi rally last week. The lack of objectivity has killed the MSM here and in the US. Today's Times is one long fest of anti-Trumpism again. I shouldn't be able to guess the reporting of a story before I read it in a supposedly neutral publication. Trump was spot on about the BBC too.
It's things like this which undermine the media's credibility.
They've had years of not really doing much journalism bar reporting their mates PR releases.
I was listening to a programme on R4 with some media types yesterday afternoon with one editor saying in London they were all 100% for staying in and chose to ignore their reporters who went out into the sticks and came back saying they could hardly find any remainers. The reports didnt fit the story so were passed over.
Until the media get back to balanced reporting they're a spent force.
You haven't joined the cult too have you? You sound like you're one Conservative Club short of the full quota!
The DUP would remain the largest party in a smaller assembly. The big losers (as you would expect in a shrinking assembly) are smaller parties - the UUP and the SDLP particularly - with the conspicuous exception of the Alliance who would gain ground relatively.
assuming of course anyone can be arsed to walk to a freezing cold polling station in the shit driving rain.
luckily NI has RHI they'll be needing the heat to warm themselves up when they get home
Reading it, it's not a poll. It's analysis from previous polling that Lucid are trying to get PR from (and working). The DUP body language tells a very different tale. I also understand the DUP MPs all left Westminster yesterday to join in the discussions. I think dry cleaners in Belfast are set for some suits to sort.
So I wonder then about the reports from BBC journalists on this suggesting there is perhaps more than one incident, more than one compromising situation.
What if its more, not just about his leisure activities. Just, more.
The original report was commissioned and paid for by political opponents of Trump in the US. If Christopher Steele went around his contacts offering money for information about whether they had compromising material on Trump and whether Trump was working for them, it seems self-evident that he will be able to find people who, for whatever reason, will say 'yes' and who will also have access to enough other relevant information to piece together a story that is superficially plausible. I think MonikerDiCanio has him bang to rights.
Lets call a spade a spade, Trump could piss on your loved ones in front of you and you'd still call it fake.
Intelligence agencies have been aware of possible issues with Trump and the Russians for YEARS. Steele's report was part triggered for commissioning because US agencies warned the GOP that Trump might have some significant difficulties as a candidate.
I know this post is from yesterday but the bit in bold is so applicable to significant sections on this site that it's unreal.
I agree, sadly becoming more like Guido or Briebart every day and I notice that a lot of longterm posters seem to be posting less or disappearing altogether. It's soon going to be very difficult to debate anything if there is no agreement on the basic facts. Give Anthony Wells UK Polling Report a try.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
I thought the interview dull -- two people shouting at each other over largely technicalities.
What will matter is whether there is any credible evidence to back the story up. If it is shown to be largely lies, then CNN will suffer repetitional damage whether or not they formally linked to the Buzzfeed article.
From the evidence I have seen, I am pretty unpersuaded that the story is true (and I think Trump is a monster).
I doubt CNN will suffer any reputational damage. It reported that the briefing existed and that it was given to Trump. That is fact, verified by Trump himself.
Meanwhile, worth noting that (as predicted on this board by a number of posters some months ago) the City lobbying has now stepped away from demanding retention of passporting in favour of equivalence:
The key issue now for the sector is achieving a transitional period beyond April 2019 in order to reassure financial services firms that they don't face a "cliff edge" if negotiations go one way or another.
The reality is that financial firms are now - and have been for months - looking at establishing entities within the EU in order to have the "passport". My own firm is doing this and the current favoured options are Madrid, Luxembourg and, possibly, Paris. How many of the existing jobs in London will move is up in the air. But uncertain times for us all.
What is certain is that waiting until the outcome of negotiations in 2019 to make decisions is not going to happen.
First sign of that humongous climbdown. Paul Givan has found his £50k to fund the Irish Language Liofa programme down the back of his sofa. There's a container of fudge heading to Stormont. Will it get there by Monday?
I read his tweet, might the money be better spent on basic numeracy for the DUP ?
Don't know if you saw the rather wonderful tweet from a Loyalist. "Did Paul Givan suddenly realise if he burns £31,500 worth of wood pellets he could make enough to fund Líofa ?"
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
And you clearly detest him and want to believe anything that confirms it - you have repeatedly called him a white supremacist. I can't take your views on him seriously.
We're all biased in opinions, I happen to think he's won the POTUS race from nowhere and become a billionaire/media star/pushed major corps into u-turns because he's very smart.
I don't hate Trump. I don't know him. What I do know is that his spokeswoman spent 10 minutes lying on CNN last night. It was quite possibly the smart thing to do. Liars are often smart people. It is rational to lie if the truth is damaging.
The question is would Trump haters hate Pence even more ? Trump might be nuts, but he is by instinct a New York liberal on social matters, Pence not so much. People might want to consider the sort of people Pence would nominate for the various government offices...
I had initially thought along those lines. Similar reason I thought Trump would be a better choice than Ted Cruz in the primaries. Yet i'm not so sure now. Trump may not be a social conservative but he is going to be happy to toe that line if it keeps the GOP onside for the rest of his programme.
I think the bigger fear among Trump haters on the left would be the economic side of things if they swapped Trump for Pence. Trump's protectionist leanings at least align more closely with the left than the right (although it's a mixed bag overall). I would think Pence would try and remove Obamacare with absolutely no replacement, Trump is more likely to at least try and put some sort of protection in place.
Plato, truly interested in your view here. If (a very big if I know) the reports of the goings on in Russia were true, would it impact your view on Trump's suitability for office?
I think it'd knock him for a bit, but not much. The credibility of the intelligence services and MSM is pretty low in the USA.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true.
It's paid for GOP/Dems oppo research who hated Trump, handed to the FBI by McCain who hates Trump, supposedly leaked by CIA who much prefer Hillary, appears on Buzzfeed who hate Trump - pushed by CNN who hate Trump and on and on and on.
I said yesterday I thought it was complete tripe - I haven't changed my mind. It's just beyond credible. Next someone will claim to have seen Trump at a neo-Nazi rally last week. The lack of objectivity has killed the MSM here and in the US. Today's Times is one long fest of anti-Trumpism again. I shouldn't be able to guess the reporting of a story before I read it in a supposedly neutral publication. Trump was spot on about the BBC too.
It's things like this which undermine the media's credibility.
They've had years of not really doing much journalism bar reporting their mates PR releases.
I was listening to a programme on R4 with some media types yesterday afternoon with one editor saying in London they were all 100% for staying in and chose to ignore their reporters who went out into the sticks and came back saying they could hardly find any remainers. The reports didnt fit the story so were passed over.
Until the media get back to balanced reporting they're a spent force.
You haven't joined the cult too have you? You sound like you're one Conservative Club short of the full quota!
Even in lovely cuddly liberal London, 40 % of people voted to Leave. Any reporter that claimed they could not find any evidence of Leave sentiment was either not trying very hard, never left the BBC canteen, or was so obviously a luvvie that any Leave leaners came over all shy with them
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Even those who are pro-life disagree with him on this. They feel it should be those that perform abortions that should be punished in the event of it being banned.
If all decisions should be taken closer to the people we may as well just get rid of the idea of permanent human rights and just have the decisions taken to the people. People can decide whether individuals should have the right to a fair trial, for instance....
So I wonder then about the reports from BBC journalists on this suggesting there is perhaps more than one incident, more than one compromising situation.
What if its more, not just about his leisure activities. Just, more.
The original report was commissioned and paid for by political opponents of Trump in the US. If Christopher Steele went around his contacts offering money for information about whether they had compromising material on Trump and whether Trump was working for them, it seems self-evident that he will be able to find people who, for whatever reason, will say 'yes' and who will also have access to enough other relevant information to piece together a story that is superficially plausible. I think MonikerDiCanio has him bang to rights.
Lets call a spade a spade, Trump could piss on your loved ones in front of you and you'd still call it fake.
Intelligence agencies have been aware of possible issues with Trump and the Russians for YEARS. Steele's report was part triggered for commissioning because US agencies warned the GOP that Trump might have some significant difficulties as a candidate.
I know this post is from yesterday but the bit in bold is so applicable to significant sections on this site that it's unreal.
I agree, sadly becoming more like Guido or Briebart every day and I notice that a lot of longterm posters seem to be posting less or disappearing altogether. It's soon going to be very difficult to debate anything if there is no agreement on the basic facts. Give Anthony Wells UK Polling Report a try.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
I thought the interview dull -- two people shouting at each other over largely technicalities.
What will matter is whether there is any credible evidence to back the story up. If it is shown to be largely lies, then CNN will suffer repetitional damage whether or not they formally linked to the Buzzfeed article.
From the evidence I have seen, I am pretty unpersuaded that the story is true (and I think Trump is a monster).
I doubt CNN will suffer any reputational damage. It reported that the briefing existed and that it was given to Trump. That is fact, verified by Trump himself.
I think you misunderstand the Dark Arts. Compulsory viewing of all series of The Thick of It, then report back !!
In the mind of the US public, this story was broken by CNN and Buzzfeed. The niceties of precisely of what was put in the public domain by CNN and what put in by Buzzfeed will have passed them largely by.
If the story is shown to be largely true, then CNN have huge, monstrous acclaim. And sign changes if the story is largely false.
NHS demand is growing at 4% a year, the economy at 2%. This type of crisis will continue as long as a proper funding settlement is not reached. And no it's not all because of European immigration
People have to start taking more responsibility for their own health instead of outsourcing it to the A&E department.
In particular prevent poor health by avoiding smoking and excessive drinking; taking regular exercise; eat more fruit and veg.
Don't expect to indulge and that the NHS can make everything right again.
" taking regular exercise"
So far this year I've walked or run 120 miles, mainly by going out for an hour or more most mornings and evenings. That's about eleven miles a day.
And my f'ing fitness tracker still says: "could do better"
I'm looking after a toddler, you useless piece of electronic dross. How the f'ing 'eck do you expect me to do 'better'? And what does 'better' even mean?
(Throws mobile and watch into bin)
Before I damaged my leg, I was doing really well with weight loss. But it required herculean efforts to lose that weight. I was walking a minimum of 12 miles a day (max ~ 28) , and rowing 10km. It's hard to shift the middle aged spread - not that I imagine you're anywhere near my age!
I think it's nature as well as nurture. My rather irritating 'problem' is weight loss, although it might seem enviable to have the problem. BMI = 21.5. I'm the same weight as I was 45 years ago (18) but seem to eat enormous amounts.
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Yup - but chest beating and jumping to wishful thinking conclusions is so much more satisfying...
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
Media in general doesn't know how to cope with this strategy. I'm not sure either... But I wonder if they shouldn't just come out and say... Donald Trump/Kelly Anne Conway lies in their headline.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
I thought the interview dull -- two people shouting at each other over largely technicalities.
What will matter is whether there is any credible evidence to back the story up. If it is shown to be largely lies, then CNN will suffer repetitional damage whether or not they formally linked to the Buzzfeed article.
From the evidence I have seen, I am pretty unpersuaded that the story is true (and I think Trump is a monster).
I doubt CNN will suffer any reputational damage. It reported that the briefing existed and that it was given to Trump. That is fact, verified by Trump himself.
I think you misunderstand the Dark Arts. Compulsory viewing of all series of The Thick of It, then report back !!
In the mind of the US public, this story was broken by CNN and Buzzfeed. The niceties of precisely of what was put in the public domain by CNN and what put in by Buzzfeed will have passed them largely by.
If the story is shown to be largely true, then CNN have huge, monstrous acclaim. And sign changes if the story is largely false.
The US public is so polarised that it will make no difference to anything. Those who dislike CNN will continue to dislike it; those who don't, won't.
So I wonder then about the reports from BBC journalists on this suggesting there is perhaps more than one incident, more than one compromising situation.
What if its more, not just about his leisure activities. Just, more.
The original report was commissioned and paid for by political opponents of Trump in the US. If Christopher Steele went around his contacts offering money for information about whether they had compromising material on Trump and whether Trump was working for them, it seems self-evident that he will be able to find people who, for whatever reason, will say 'yes' and who will also have access to enough other relevant information to piece together a story that is superficially plausible. I think MonikerDiCanio has him bang to rights.
Lets call a spade a spade, Trump could piss on your loved ones in front of you and you'd still call it fake.
Intelligence agencies have been aware of possible issues with Trump and the Russians for YEARS. Steele's report was part triggered for commissioning because US agencies warned the GOP that Trump might have some significant difficulties as a candidate.
I know this post is from yesterday but the bit in bold is so applicable to significant sections on this site that it's unreal.
I agree, sadly becoming more like Guido or Briebart every day and I notice that a lot of longterm posters seem to be posting less or disappearing altogether. It's soon going to be very difficult to debate anything if there is no agreement on the basic facts. Give Anthony Wells UK Polling Report a try.
100%. This site is moving so further to right it can hardly claim it's 'representative' of public opinion like it has done previously. The idea most of the UK population's first inclination is to defend Trump on everything is fanciful.
I often think AlstairMeeks' observations on here are spot on.
I'll try UKPR. Haven't been there for literally years though, I used go on there every Sunday morning to see what the polls were saying!
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Yup - but chest beating and jumping to wishful thinking conclusions is so much more satisfying...
It's not wishful thinking conclusions that Trump groped women. It's something he admitted on tape.
People can decide whether individuals should have the right to a fair trial, for instance....
They have. See recent laws in the USA regarding the application of habeas corpus to enemy combatants, or for than matter changes in the UK to overturn double jeopardy. It all depends on what you consider to be a fair trial, and for whom.
Someone on the radio yesterday, I think it was Nick Cohen??? pointed out that Corbyn and his mates are against lots of things, but when it comes to formulating an actual policy, they are unable and unwilling to formulate it. Its easier to be against something than do something about it.
That's pretty much true of any party. The moment you formulate a policy, it will have holes in it. That's true of any policy - the key issue is how much the policy gets inspected and how much publicity the holes get.
An often forgotten aspect of the Brown/Blair/Mandelson triumvirate was they would spend months bullet-proofing every policy in run-up to '97.
Cheers.
I guess a telling anecdote would be that when Brown did that 10p tax rate wheeze, the holes got spotted here in minutes but took almost a year for it to gain traction in the 'real world'.
Ms. Apocalypse, the balance has shifted over time, generally reflecting shifts in public sentiment. There were far more lefties when I first joined in 2007. The only group that's consistently been under-represented (even in their heyday) is Scottish Labour.
Impeachment awaits at some point, the question is how far will he have gone.
Trump (and for that matter a lot of his supporters as well) cannot cope with any criticism thrown his way. I remember reading the DM comments section on an article where Alec Baldwin had taken the p*ss out of him. The Trumpers sounded so mad....in fact they sounded triggered. If a comedian having a laugh is making you get upset, you know something is wrong.
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
I guess there is a fine line between having a personality that clearly makes you unfit for high public office and just being clinically insane.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
Clinical insanity is a constitutional cause for removal from office under the 25th Amendment, which while it ultimately requires the same 2/3rds majority as impeachment if Trump wanted to contest the declaration that he was medically unfit, is a much quicker route to removing him than full impeachment hearings. It also has the advantage to those with this end in mind, of removing the powers of the presidency from him in the interim (which impeachment doesn't). Such a move would require Pence's assent. Those thinking of betting on Trump's removal from office within the first term / first year / whenever ought to consider the scenario because although it would remove the powers of office from him, he would formally remain President with Pence only becoming Acting President; it's a regency, not a dethronement.
The question is would Trump haters hate Pence even more ? Trump might be nuts, but he is by instinct a New York liberal on social matters, Pence not so much. People might want to consider the sort of people Pence would nominate for the various government offices...
The question is whether it might be necessary (though I do accept your tactical thinking of President Frying-Pan having run with Vice-President Fire).
People can decide whether individuals should have the right to a fair trial, for instance....
They have. See recent laws in the USA regarding the application of habeas corpus to enemy combatants, or for than matter changes in the UK to overturn double jeopardy. It all depends on what you consider to be a fair trial, and for whom.
They've done that at state level have they?
Well then that's odd.
Then again there seem to be a number of Americans who don't think right to healthcare should be a human right so....
@DanielHewittITV: I'm told there's disagreement in Labour over when to hold Copeland by-election. Local party want it ASAP (March), party HQ keen on May 4th.
If Kellyanne Conway was British, she'd be looking at a knighthood for her performances as Trump's spokesperson over the past six months. Reminds me of an American Alastair Campbell.
I've watched about 80% of the interview so far and Anderson is horribly rattled. She's very good at looking very reasonable and normal. Campbell always struck me as a smart-arse debate team sort.
Cooper clearly struggles with the fact that she is flat-out lying.
Media in general doesn't know how to cope with this strategy. I'm not sure either... But I wonder if they shouldn't just come out and say... Donald Trump/Kelly Anne Conway lies in their headline.
It'll take a while to get used to the post-truth world and, as ever, the first-adopters have the early advantage. But, as with all developments, in time the rest will catch up and then overtake them. Lying works for a while. Then it stops working. Because it is not true. Trump is already at historically low levels of approval and that is before he is on office. He needs to deliver big quickly on the promises he has made. If he doesn't he is fooked.
@DanielHewittITV: I'm told there's disagreement in Labour over when to hold Copeland by-election. Local party want it ASAP (March), party HQ keen on May 4th.
Interesting, maybe they think they're being beaten on the ground atm.
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Yup - but chest beating and jumping to wishful thinking conclusions is so much more satisfying...
It's not wishful thinking conclusions that Trump groped women. It's something he admitted on tape.
Nor is it hearsay when someone states something about themselves.
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Even those who are pro-life disagree with him on this. They feel it should be those that perform abortions that should be punished in the event of it being banned.
If all decisions should be taken closer to the people we may as well just get rid of the idea of permanent human rights and just have the decisions taken to the people. People can decide whether individuals should have the right to a fair trial, for instance....
Pro-choice is a very elastic term in the US re late terminations that many here in the UK would recoil from. And third trimester ones are infanticide IMO without an incredibly good reason i.e. mother's death.
I'd a termination in my 20s at 12 weeks. It still bothers me 30yrs later.
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
While it goes against the grain, I think you're being unfair to Trump on the abortion issue (though I might be misremembering and stand to be corrected).
Wasn't his answer that *if* abortion were made illegal then those breaking the law ought to be punished and that the job of the executive is to do so and that were he the president in such circumstances, he'd have to do just that. Trump's answer was politically naive but constitutionally correct.
So I wonder then about the reports from BBC journalists on this suggesting there is perhaps more than one incident, more than one compromising situation.
What if its more, not just about his leisure activities. Just, more.
The original report was commissioned and paid for by political opponents of Trump in the US. If Christopher Steele went around his contacts offering money for information about whether they had compromising material on Trump and whether Trump was working for them, it seems self-evident that he will be able to find people who, for whatever reason, will say 'yes' and who will also have access to enough other relevant information to piece together a story that is superficially plausible. I think MonikerDiCanio has him bang to rights.
Lets call a spade a spade, Trump could piss on your loved ones in front of you and you'd still call it fake.
Intelligence agencies have been aware of possible issues with Trump and the Russians for YEARS. Steele's report was part triggered for commissioning because US agencies warned the GOP that Trump might have some significant difficulties as a candidate.
I know this post is from yesterday but the bit in bold is so applicable to significant sections on this site that it's unreal.
I agree, sadly becoming more like Guido or Briebart every day and I notice that a lot of longterm posters seem to be posting less or disappearing altogether. It's soon going to be very difficult to debate anything if there is no agreement on the basic facts. Give Anthony Wells UK Polling Report a try.
100%. This site is moving so further to right it can hardly claim it's 'representative' of public opinion like it has done previously. The idea most of the UK population's first inclination is to defend Trump on everything is fanciful.
I often think AlstairMeeks' observations on here are spot on.
I'll try UKPR. Haven't been there for literally years though, I used go on there every Sunday morning to see what the polls were saying!
I'd be very sorry to see you give up on PB, I always enjoy reading your thoughts and views. There are certainly ebbs and flows in terms of the posters - when I first joined in '06, it was still very much Labour uber alles.
I do think you're overestimating the amount of Trump support amongst regular PBers. I both like and respect Plato, but I think she's completely wrong on The Orange One. In the context of this site's purpose, she did call the US election correctly, and that's more than most. From a political point of view, he's still odious.
Ms. Apocalypse, the balance has shifted over time, generally reflecting shifts in public sentiment. There were far more lefties when I first joined in 2007. The only group that's consistently been under-represented (even in their heyday) is Scottish Labour.
This shift doesn't reflect public sentiment. Most people in this country don't like Trump.
The question is whether it might be necessary (though I do accept your tactical thinking of President Frying-Pan having run with Vice-President Fire).
I was speculating whether Senators and Congressmen might ultimately stay their hand if they have a slightly nutty but erratic and potentially fairly ineffectual President Trump, who would be replaced by a focused, coherent, politically adept, and supposedly dangerously clever hard-right alternative in Pence (who would then probably bring in Cruz as his hatchet man).
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
The first is hearsay, and the second is misreporting, although both are probably true
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
Yup - but chest beating and jumping to wishful thinking conclusions is so much more satisfying...
It's not wishful thinking conclusions that Trump groped women. It's something he admitted on tape.
Agreed, and that is a much more serious accusation than that he cavorted with Russian hookers. Public groping and sexual assault should be the subject of a serious investigation.
The current allegations are designed to make Trump look ridiculous and demeaning. The nearest parallel is the allegation that David Mellors had sex in a Chelsea shirt. It destroyed him by making him look a figure of fun.
That is why I seriously doubt whether the current allegations are true.
I think what has happened demeans journalism & journalists. Journalists often forget that they are only just above politicians in the trust stakes.
If what is alleged is really true, then there are plenty of ways of confirming it. I think if there is no confirmation -- and Trump is hardly going to let the matter rest -- then Trump’s enemies will have overplayed their hand.
Ms. Apocalypse, the balance has shifted over time, generally reflecting shifts in public sentiment. There were far more lefties when I first joined in 2007. The only group that's consistently been under-represented (even in their heyday) is Scottish Labour.
This shift doesn't reflect public sentiment. Most people in this country don't like Trump.
NHS demand is growing at 4% a year, the economy at 2%. This type of crisis will continue as long as a proper funding settlement is not reached. And no it's not all because of European immigration
People have to start taking more responsibility for their own health instead of outsourcing it to the A&E department.
In particular prevent poor health by avoiding smoking and excessive drinking; taking regular exercise; eat more fruit and veg.
Don't expect to indulge and that the NHS can make everything right again.
" taking regular exercise"
So far this year I've walked or run 120 miles, mainly by going out for an hour or more most mornings and evenings. That's about eleven miles a day.
And my f'ing fitness tracker still says: "could do better"
I'm looking after a toddler, you useless piece of electronic dross. How the f'ing 'eck do you expect me to do 'better'? And what does 'better' even mean?
(Throws mobile and watch into bin)
Before I damaged my leg, I was doing really well with weight loss. But it required herculean efforts to lose that weight. I was walking a minimum of 12 miles a day (max ~ 28) , and rowing 10km. It's hard to shift the middle aged spread - not that I imagine you're anywhere near my age!
I am no longer middle aged -OAP , can no longer run due to injuries and long walks hurt from running injuries. So I do daily Ashtanga Yoga - which is quite physically demanded - see You Tube videos - 15 minutes at 7am.. coupled with two hourly group sessions at the gym. BUT the key to losing weight is iron control of eating and drinking. Drink lots of water/tea etc without sugar and eat no sweets/sugary foods - and eat bran and bananas for breakfast.. |And weigh regularly. I lose the 3 kg I put on at Christmas in the 4 months to May..and then flatline until the next Christmas.
I have the physique of a Lightweight (70 odd Kg) weightlifter - from weightlifting! - so keeping muscle and avoiding fat is a struggle all the time.
Ms. Apocalypse, the balance has shifted over time, generally reflecting shifts in public sentiment. There were far more lefties when I first joined in 2007. The only group that's consistently been under-represented (even in their heyday) is Scottish Labour.
The real shift I've seen in 5-6 years is that those (hard to believe now but once very much the majority) who used to be enthusiastic pom pom girls for Cameron & Osborne now never miss an opportunity to give them a kicking. I would imagine their political stances are largely unchanged.
Mr. T, best way to improve the site is by example. If you think people are factually wrong, say so, cite evidence etc.
Whilst I do think we're in for an 'interesting' time this year, it's also worth noting that the consensus (Clinton victory) was wrong.
A very good point - I suspect that 2017 fake news will be replaced by more tribal behaviour - the media played a huge role for months re BLM, alleged Trump hate crimes et al - just look at the Chicago kidnap/torture case. These youngsters believed all whites voted Trump/were therefore racists = should be scalped on Facebook Live.
I think the media has been appallingly irresponsible - the Dallas cop assassinations is another horrific example. Dallas has one of the best records for race relations, but BLM media puffing lead to multiple planned murders. I'm disgusted by it all.
Ms. Apocalypse, could be wrong, but I'd guess that (Trump not being popular/liked) would be reflected by PBers, were there a poll.
It's bound to be the case that a site dedicated to political betting and frequented by people into such is going to be somewhat skewed rather than perfectly representative of public opinion, though. I suspect most people don't discuss the Second Punic War nearly as much as they should.
Comments
Trump needs to come to terms with the fact America is not a dictatorship; it is not Russia. He will be scrutinised throughout his Presidency as all other Presidents are, and this is the way that it should be. I can see the guy in two years literally still banging on about Hillary on his twitter. For a 70 year old man, it's amazing how insecure he is, and how sensitive to criticism he is.
That said Labour will win (I think)
UKIP definitely won't - thats the basis of my betting anyway.
Either way, it is going to be a f****** nightmare over the next few years.
And in case anyone is still wondering whether The Donald can action a nuclear attack without any checks or balances, Hodges posted this link yesterday:
http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2016/11/18/the-president-and-the-bomb/
Yep. But then they voted for Dubya (at least once, anyway). So I'm not surprised that Americans would vote Trump. At least most of their electorate didn't for vote him and actually voted for Hillary. Watching one of Rachel Maddow's history lessons (who btw seriously owned Kellyanne Conway a few weeks ago) the last time this situation (the big gap between the electoral college and the popular vote) occured was during the Reconstruction era....
A determined public health programme to rid peoples' diets of junk food would prevent most of the sad cases - foot and leg amputations - featured in the BBC programme on type 2 diabetes. That failure to prevent disease is costing the NHS/taxpayers about £12bn per year.
.....a visit to Buckingham Palace would be a hoot!.
.....I'd be very surprised if he lasts the four years.
Frankly, I think the whole thing is hilarious rubbish and a great example of confirmation bias - by those who desperately want it to be true.
It's paid for GOP/Dems oppo research who hated Trump, handed to the FBI by McCain who hates Trump, supposedly leaked by CIA who much prefer Hillary, appears on Buzzfeed who hate Trump - pushed by CNN who hate Trump and on and on and on.
I said yesterday I thought it was complete tripe - I haven't changed my mind. It's just beyond credible. Next someone will claim to have seen Trump at a neo-Nazi rally last week. The lack of objectivity has killed the MSM here and in the US. Today's Times is one long fest of anti-Trumpism again. I shouldn't be able to guess the reporting of a story before I read it in a supposedly neutral publication. Trump was spot on about the BBC too.
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland-assembly-election/dup-likely-to-remain-largest-party-pollster-suggests-35361076.html
The DUP would remain the largest party in a smaller assembly. The big losers (as you would expect in a shrinking assembly) are smaller parties - the UUP and the SDLP particularly - with the conspicuous exception of the Alliance who would gain ground relatively.
They've had years of not really doing much journalism bar reporting their mates PR releases.
I was listening to a programme on R4 with some media types yesterday afternoon with one editor saying in London they were all 100% for staying in and chose to ignore their reporters who went out into the sticks and came back saying they could hardly find any remainers. The reports didnt fit the story so were passed over.
Until the media get back to balanced reporting they're a spent force.
The Labour MP for Copeland has no real future, as the Whitehaven & Workington seat seems spoken for by the current Labour MP for Workington. So, it is a long slog of a campaign for 3 years max as an MP.
That might make the Tory candidate & campaign slightly more energized.
luckily NI has RHI they'll be needing the heat to warm themselves up when they get home
"Trump was spot on about the BBC too."
Guffaw :-D
Anyone who gropes women, and feels that women who have abortions should be punished is not socially liberal.
I agree with you on Pence though - he is actually insane. Just as much as Trump is.
We're all biased in opinions, I happen to think he's won the POTUS race from nowhere and become a billionaire/media star/pushed major corps into u-turns because he's very smart.
What will matter is whether there is any credible evidence to back the story up. If it is shown to be largely lies, then CNN will suffer repetitional damage whether or not they formally linked to the Buzzfeed article.
From the evidence I have seen, I am pretty unpersuaded that the story is true (and I think Trump is a monster).
Trump actually said that if abortions were made illegal then women should be punished, it would be a strange world if people were not punished for breaking the law. Everyone went galloping after the wrong signal, the more important question is should abortion be made unlawful, and he didn't actually say that either, he said it should be a state decision, which while I can understand your suspicion for obvious reasons, is hard to argue against, since all it says on the face of it, is the decisions should be taken closer to the people.
What is certain is that waiting until the outcome of negotiations in 2019 to make decisions is not going to happen.
I think the bigger fear among Trump haters on the left would be the economic side of things if they swapped Trump for Pence. Trump's protectionist leanings at least align more closely with the left than the right (although it's a mixed bag overall). I would think Pence would try and remove Obamacare with absolutely no replacement, Trump is more likely to at least try and put some sort of protection in place.
If all decisions should be taken closer to the people we may as well just get rid of the idea of permanent human rights and just have the decisions taken to the people. People can decide whether individuals should have the right to a fair trial, for instance....
In the mind of the US public, this story was broken by CNN and Buzzfeed. The niceties of precisely of what was put in the public domain by CNN and what put in by Buzzfeed will have passed them largely by.
If the story is shown to be largely true, then CNN have huge, monstrous acclaim. And sign changes if the story is largely false.
I'm not sure either... But I wonder if they shouldn't just come out and say... Donald Trump/Kelly Anne Conway lies in their headline.
Whilst I do think we're in for an 'interesting' time this year, it's also worth noting that the consensus (Clinton victory) was wrong.
I often think AlstairMeeks' observations on here are spot on.
I'll try UKPR. Haven't been there for literally years though, I used go on there every Sunday morning to see what the polls were saying!
I guess a telling anecdote would be that when Brown did that 10p tax rate wheeze, the holes got spotted here in minutes but took almost a year for it to gain traction in the 'real world'.
Well then that's odd.
Then again there seem to be a number of Americans who don't think right to healthcare should be a human right so....
I'd a termination in my 20s at 12 weeks. It still bothers me 30yrs later.
Wasn't his answer that *if* abortion were made illegal then those breaking the law ought to be punished and that the job of the executive is to do so and that were he the president in such circumstances, he'd have to do just that. Trump's answer was politically naive but constitutionally correct.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/819489787992276996
I do think you're overestimating the amount of Trump support amongst regular PBers. I both like and respect Plato, but I think she's completely wrong on The Orange One. In the context of this site's purpose, she did call the US election correctly, and that's more than most. From a political point of view, he's still odious.
The current allegations are designed to make Trump look ridiculous and demeaning. The nearest parallel is the allegation that David Mellors had sex in a Chelsea shirt. It destroyed him by making him look a figure of fun.
That is why I seriously doubt whether the current allegations are true.
I think what has happened demeans journalism & journalists. Journalists often forget that they are only just above politicians in the trust stakes.
If what is alleged is really true, then there are plenty of ways of confirming it. I think if there is no confirmation -- and Trump is hardly going to let the matter rest -- then Trump’s enemies will have overplayed their hand.
Whats that got to do with anything ?
BUT the key to losing weight is iron control of eating and drinking. Drink lots of water/tea etc without sugar and eat no sweets/sugary foods - and eat bran and bananas for breakfast..
|And weigh regularly. I lose the 3 kg I put on at Christmas in the 4 months to May..and then flatline until the next Christmas.
I have the physique of a Lightweight (70 odd Kg) weightlifter - from weightlifting! - so keeping muscle and avoiding fat is a struggle all the time.
I think the media has been appallingly irresponsible - the Dallas cop assassinations is another horrific example. Dallas has one of the best records for race relations, but BLM media puffing lead to multiple planned murders. I'm disgusted by it all.
It's bound to be the case that a site dedicated to political betting and frequented by people into such is going to be somewhat skewed rather than perfectly representative of public opinion, though. I suspect most people don't discuss the Second Punic War nearly as much as they should.