Middle Class in the US doesn't really mean the same thing. It really encapsulates working people who have steady jobs often in semi-skilled / skilled roles, so in the UK it would include pretty much all what we call the working class e.g. all your factory / warehouse type workers.
It is a way of referring to a demographic of people who aren't on benefits, but head off to work every day, even for very low wages e.g. we would call working poor, through to normal office type workers.
So it means people in the middle, rather than the top 5%.
Most people in the UK who put their kids through private education* self-identify as middle class.
(* i.e. approximately the richest 7%)
I remember smiling when I read Lord Hailsham's autobiography 'A Sparrow's Flight' (very good, by the way), where he self-defined as middle-class on the basis that he worked for a living i.e. he didn't have an independent income. This despite the fact that his father was a viscount (as he would be), with a house in the country, a seven-bedroom townhouse in London (both with servants), and was sent to Eton.
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
At this rate I have to question not only Hillary's Iowa win, but Obama's and Kerry's (Not that it matters), because it's the first time they actually count votes and are finding all sorts of worms in the can.
The last 3% aren't in Iowa. They are satellite caucuses held by people who have connections to Iowa (mostly in other parts of the US).
There are also some challenges to some of the people voting in - for example - Van Nuys California, and whether they are eligible to vote in the Iowa caucuses in the first place.
It's a clusterf*ck. Sanders is winning these satellite caucuses, but the people in question may have no right to vote in Iowa.
"Bernie Sanders has a huge January haul. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont raised $25 million in January, his campaign said on Thursday, a staggering sum that gives him an enviable financial advantage at a crucial moment in the Democratic primary race.
He plans to use the windfall to immediately buy $5.5 million in television and digital ads across 10 states, at a time when some of his rivals are shifting or cutting their existing ad reservations."
Tell me US Dems are not about to do a Corbyn.
They might well do,
But remember, it's probably in the best interest of America and the World that Trump is re-elected. Trump has been following the same fiscal policies as Anthony Barber and Edward Heath. The government spending ahead of income late in the economic cycle. Right now, the US government is on track to run a deficit of 5% of GDP this year.
That's worse than during the Korean or Vietnam or Iraq or any other war post WW2. It's worse than in any recession, bar two years of the GFC.
Normally deficits are counter-cyclical. The economy grows, so do tax receipts, and the deficit shrinks. Deliberately running a massive deficit now, so as to goose economic growth into an election is storing up massive amounts of trouble. When the slowdown comes, where does deficit spending go? 8% of GDP? 10%?
And, of course, deficit spending like this makes it impossible to close the current account gap.
Trump and the Republicans need to clean this mess up. Trump must be re-elected.
I don't get this argument at all. Its like arguing that Brown should have been re-elected in 2010 so he had to make the cuts to reduce the unsustainable deficit.
What the US urgently needs is competent, capable governance looking to rebalance their economy, something that they haven't really had since Clinton. Its a moot point whether any of the Democratic candidates can deliver that (Bloomberg being by far the obvious choice) but the answer for Trump is crystal: he can't. 4 more years of Trump will simply aggravate America's problems and make any subsequent adjustments more painful.
There will be a nasty recession.
The government in power will be blamed.
It is better that the party that let the US's imbalances get out of control is blamed, rather than the people who took over.
Tories could not cast stones at anyone given their record and if it had been Tory it would have been a one day suspension at best, or perhaps a days education. Difference is SNP root out their bad ones quickly , no hiding them for a few weeks like Tories do.
*cough* Salmond *cough*.
David, aside from fact he may well be found innocent , he also left SNP immediately, that is most uncommon with the roasters that pop up in the Tories.
He may well be found innocent of criminal charges but did he not leave the SNP when he chose to judicially review the Scottish government about disciplinary procedures being brought against him?
No party can claim the moral high ground on this.
He was decent enough to resign immediately I believe, he would have known he was stitched up like a kipper either way. Should be some interesting stuff come out , ie retrospective changes so they could go after him , alleged collusion and likely much more. Will give the unionists plenty of grist for the mill for a month or two.
"Bernie Sanders has a huge January haul. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont raised $25 million in January, his campaign said on Thursday, a staggering sum that gives him an enviable financial advantage at a crucial moment in the Democratic primary race.
He plans to use the windfall to immediately buy $5.5 million in television and digital ads across 10 states, at a time when some of his rivals are shifting or cutting their existing ad reservations."
Tell me US Dems are not about to do a Corbyn.
They might well do,
But remember, it's probably in the best interest of America and the World that Trump is re-elected. Trump has been following the same fiscal policies as Anthony Barber and Edward Heath. The government spending ahead of income late in the economic cycle. Right now, the US government is on track to run a deficit of 5% of GDP this year.
That's worse than during the Korean or Vietnam or Iraq or any other war post WW2. It's worse than in any recession, bar two years of the GFC.
Normally deficits are counter-cyclical. The economy grows, so do tax receipts, and the deficit shrinks. Deliberately running a massive deficit now, so as to goose economic growth into an election is storing up massive amounts of trouble. When the slowdown comes, where does deficit spending go? 8% of GDP? 10%?
And, of course, deficit spending like this makes it impossible to close the current account gap.
Trump and the Republicans need to clean this mess up. Trump must be re-elected.
I don't get this argument at all. Its like arguing that Brown should have been re-elected in 2010 so he had to make the cuts to reduce the unsustainable deficit.
What the US urgently needs is competent, capable governance looking to rebalance their economy, something that they haven't really had since Clinton. Its a moot point whether any of the Democratic candidates can deliver that (Bloomberg being by far the obvious choice) but the answer for Trump is crystal: he can't. 4 more years of Trump will simply aggravate America's problems and make any subsequent adjustments more painful.
There will be a nasty recession.
The government in power will be blamed.
It is better that the party that let the US's imbalances get out of control is blamed, rather than the people who took over.
Only if those people are the best to deal with the recession and take appropriate action (in which case, Lord help us). That is way more important than blame.
At this rate I have to question not only Hillary's Iowa win, but Obama's and Kerry's (Not that it matters), because it's the first time they actually count votes and are finding all sorts of worms in the can.
Iowa's changes of remaining first primary are disappearing faster than snow in May.
At this rate I have to question not only Hillary's Iowa win, but Obama's and Kerry's (Not that it matters), because it's the first time they actually count votes and are finding all sorts of worms in the can.
is this the end of the road for caucuses? as in will the Iowa party be under presser to just have a simple primary next time, if they what to stay first in the nation?
Not all satellites are out of state. The out of state satellites have mostly reported, the main issue is the out-of-hours satellites in-state in Congressional District 1.
Probably going to go heavily Sanders like the other satellites in Iowa.
(I don't disagree the whole concept of satellites is problematic Democrat 'gerrymandering', but thems the rules.)
"Bernie Sanders has a huge January haul. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont raised $25 million in January, his campaign said on Thursday, a staggering sum that gives him an enviable financial advantage at a crucial moment in the Democratic primary race.
He plans to use the windfall to immediately buy $5.5 million in television and digital ads across 10 states, at a time when some of his rivals are shifting or cutting their existing ad reservations."
Tell me US Dems are not about to do a Corbyn.
They might well do,
But remember, it's probably in the best interest of America and the World that Trump is re-elected. Trump has been following the same fiscal policies as Anthony Barber and Edward Heath. The government spending ahead of income late in the economic cycle. Right now, the US government is on track to run a deficit of 5% of GDP this year.
That's worse than during the Korean or Vietnam or Iraq or any other war post WW2. It's worse than in any recession, bar two years of the GFC.
Normally deficits are counter-cyclical. The economy grows, so do tax receipts, and the deficit shrinks. Deliberately running a massive deficit now, so as to goose economic growth into an election is storing up massive amounts of trouble. When the slowdown comes, where does deficit spending go? 8% of GDP? 10%?
And, of course, deficit spending like this makes it impossible to close the current account gap.
Trump and the Republicans need to clean this mess up. Trump must be re-elected.
Given that if trump does win, he will then not be elegable for another election, he is probably better positioned to do things that will make him temporarily unpopular, i.e. budget cuts. and tax rises. but will he? and if he does will he be able to get that though the congress?
As you say running a budget deficit of a trillion dolers 5% of GDP after 10 years of economic growth, is not sustainable, ether somebody terns this around or we will have to get used to thinking of the USA as a second rate nation soon.
What are the odds on Trump trying to get Amendment 22 repealed during a second term?
He could try but he is unlikely to get the 2/3 Congressional majority to pass it
By my count from the BBC's list there's been 228 confirmed cases of the coronavirus from outside China and so far 2 fatalities outside China. Which albeit a small sample is a morbidity rate of just under 1%
Of course some of those who have been confirmed may not survive, but equally others may have caught it but not been diagnosed, it seems quite unlikely to me that the Chinese are massaging the figures to save face and the morbidity rate is worse than 2%
At the risk of being alarmist, the Chinese doctor who tried to warn about coronavirus on 30 December, died today, over 5 weeks later.
How many of the 228 will succumb in the coming weeks?
Not alarmist at all. What it demonstrates is just how limited is knowledge of the disease progression. He was aware of symptoms a month ago, and has only now succumbed. We also don’t have much of an idea of what percentage of the actually infected have been identified by the Chinese, and how many others there are.
As it’s now clear the Chinese have identified symptom free carriers who have infected others, it also looks as though going to be very difficult to control any time soon.
The last 3% aren't in Iowa. They are satellite caucuses held by people who have connections to Iowa (mostly in other parts of the US).
There are also some challenges to some of the people voting in - for example - Van Nuys California, and whether they are eligible to vote in the Iowa caucuses in the first place.
It's a clusterf*ck. Sanders is winning these satellite caucuses, but the people in question may have no right to vote in Iowa.
And yet it kind of doesn't matter (except for those with bets to settle). Sanders and Buttigieg were more or less joint first, everyone else were also-rans. That's a pretty clear verdict.
The problem for Buttigieg (who I should say has done much better than I expected) is that he's bet the farm on the first states, and has little presence in the later ones. He hopes that a string of victories will enable him to bootstrap up in those too, but it's vulnerable to one bad result.
Tories could not cast stones at anyone given their record and if it had been Tory it would have been a one day suspension at best, or perhaps a days education. Difference is SNP root out their bad ones quickly , no hiding them for a few weeks like Tories do.
what utter bollocks.. no one would have know had it not been for the Scottish Sun.
You thick arsehole, read the post. The SNP chuck bad ones out quickly. It was the boy's mother that discovered it and sold the story to the SUN. If they had known about it he would have been chucked out.
To be fair to the SNP, they did a much better job of disavowing Neale Hanvey at the last GE than any of the other parties did with their candidates accused of indiscretions. Labour and the Lib Dems were still promoting supposed "independents" just before the election, and the Tories still haven't made a proper decision on Sally-Ann Hart, amongst others.
At this rate I have to question not only Hillary's Iowa win, but Obama's and Kerry's (Not that it matters), because it's the first time they actually count votes and are finding all sorts of worms in the can.
is this the end of the road for caucuses? as in will the Iowa party be under presser to just have a simple primary next time, if they what to stay first in the nation?
But they can't have a primary instead of a caucus and still be first - New Hampshire law states that they have to be the first primary and constantly move the date of their primary if needed.
"Bernie Sanders has a huge January haul. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont raised $25 million in January, his campaign said on Thursday, a staggering sum that gives him an enviable financial advantage at a crucial moment in the Democratic primary race.
He plans to use the windfall to immediately buy $5.5 million in television and digital ads across 10 states, at a time when some of his rivals are shifting or cutting their existing ad reservations."
Tell me US Dems are not about to do a Corbyn.
They might well do,
But remember, it's probably in the best interest of America and the World that Trump is re-elected. Trump has been following the same fiscal policies as Anthony Barber and Edward Heath. The government spending ahead of income late in the economic cycle. Right now, the US government is on track to run a deficit of 5% of GDP this year.
That's worse than during the Korean or Vietnam or Iraq or any other war post WW2. It's worse than in any recession, bar two years of the GFC.
Normally deficits are counter-cyclical. The economy grows, so do tax receipts, and the deficit shrinks. Deliberately running a massive deficit now, so as to goose economic growth into an election is storing up massive amounts of trouble. When the slowdown comes, where does deficit spending go? 8% of GDP? 10%?
And, of course, deficit spending like this makes it impossible to close the current account gap.
Trump and the Republicans need to clean this mess up. Trump must be re-elected.
As you say running a budget deficit of a trillion dolers 5% of GDP after 10 years of economic growth, is not sustainable, ether somebody terns this around or we will have to get used to thinking of the USA as a second rate nation soon.
What are the odds on Trump trying to get Amendment 22 repealed during a second term?
It would be more in keeping for him to just try to ignore it or have Ivanka run on his behalf.
Though it would be extremely funny if the 22nd amendment was repealed and then Obama won the 2024 election.
I should think the odds on an attempt on the 22nd are very high. That's if the entire constitution hasn't be rewritten to give him Biggly President For Life.
Edit: And the way Dems are behaving it will be their fault.
Absent a coup, in which event it’s not worth worrying about anyway, the chances of the 22nd being repealed are precisely nil.
Ayn Rand or Trump the decision of our time. I think I might swing Trump.
Would you? Not sure I would. My Trumperphobia is such that I would pay almost any price to see him gone. For example, imagine if the horrors of Brexit and "Boris" - both of which I hate - mean in some spooky way that Trump loses WH2020. If this were an actual trade that I could somehow make I would make it in a heartbeat.
For me the implementation of Randian rational self interest is the antithesis of a functioning society. And although i can't argue that Trump has many altruistic qualities I do not think he has the ideological drive to change society only profit from it.
The last 3% aren't in Iowa. They are satellite caucuses held by people who have connections to Iowa (mostly in other parts of the US).
There are also some challenges to some of the people voting in - for example - Van Nuys California, and whether they are eligible to vote in the Iowa caucuses in the first place.
It's a clusterf*ck. Sanders is winning these satellite caucuses, but the people in question may have no right to vote in Iowa.
And yet it kind of doesn't matter (except for those with bets to settle). Sanders and Buttigieg were more or less joint first, everyone else were also-rans. That's a pretty clear verdict.
The problem for Buttigieg (who I should say has done much better than I expected) is that he's bet the farm on the first states, and has little presence in the later ones. He hopes that a string of victories will enable him to bootstrap up in those too, but it's vulnerable to one bad result.
That was what I wrote 36 hours ago!
Ultimately, they both got eleven delegates that count towards the nomination, while Warren got five, and everyone else got none.
"Bernie Sanders has a huge January haul. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont raised $25 million in January, his campaign said on Thursday, a staggering sum that gives him an enviable financial advantage at a crucial moment in the Democratic primary race.
He plans to use the windfall to immediately buy $5.5 million in television and digital ads across 10 states, at a time when some of his rivals are shifting or cutting their existing ad reservations."
Tell me US Dems are not about to do a Corbyn.
They might well do,
But remember, it's probably in the best interest of America and the World that Trump is re-elected. Trump has been following the same fiscal policies as Anthony Barber and Edward Heath. The government spending ahead of income late in the economic cycle. Right now, the US government is on track to run a deficit of 5% of GDP this year.
That's worse than during the Korean or Vietnam or Iraq or any other war post WW2. It's worse than in any recession, bar two years of the GFC.
Normally deficits are counter-cyclical. The economy grows, so do tax receipts, and the deficit shrinks. Deliberately running a massive deficit now, so as to goose economic growth into an election is storing up massive amounts of trouble. When the slowdown comes, where does deficit spending go? 8% of GDP? 10%?
And, of course, deficit spending like this makes it impossible to close the current account gap.
Trump and the Republicans need to clean this mess up. Trump must be re-elected.
I don't get this argument at all. Its like arguing that Brown should have been re-elected in 2010 so he had to make the cuts to reduce the unsustainable deficit.
What the US urgently needs is competent, capable governance looking to rebalance their economy, something that they haven't really had since Clinton. Its a moot point whether any of the Democratic candidates can deliver that (Bloomberg being by far the obvious choice) but the answer for Trump is crystal: he can't. 4 more years of Trump will simply aggravate America's problems and make any subsequent adjustments more painful.
There will be a nasty recession.
The government in power will be blamed.
It is better that the party that let the US's imbalances get out of control is blamed, rather than the people who took over.
Would that be Bill Clinton's party, or that of one of the Georges Bush?
Betfair's Iowa market is now very thin. It looks like the big players have run away.
I wouldn't bet on Iowa anymore either right now.
The situation is so bad that I'm coming to the point of view that the Iowa Caucus has always been rigged since it's inception, that would explain all the surprise results through it's history.
Never bet on a rigged race unless you are the one who does the rigging.
The last 3% aren't in Iowa. They are satellite caucuses held by people who have connections to Iowa (mostly in other parts of the US).
There are also some challenges to some of the people voting in - for example - Van Nuys California, and whether they are eligible to vote in the Iowa caucuses in the first place.
It's a clusterf*ck. Sanders is winning these satellite caucuses, but the people in question may have no right to vote in Iowa.
And yet it kind of doesn't matter (except for those with bets to settle). Sanders and Buttigieg were more or less joint first, everyone else were also-rans. That's a pretty clear verdict.
The problem for Buttigieg (who I should say has done much better than I expected) is that he's bet the farm on the first states, and has little presence in the later ones. He hopes that a string of victories will enable him to bootstrap up in those too, but it's vulnerable to one bad result.
And re Buttigieg, you're absolutely correct. He's in good shape in NH and OK shape in Nevada...
But in SC, he needs a remarkable improvement.
And he's not got much presence in the Super Tuesday states. It's not terminal. But, as you say, it needs him to run Sanders neck-and-neck in New Hampshire, and to be top two in Nevada. If he stumbles in pretty much any early state, then he loses the aura of success.
And that aura is really all he's got. That and being clearly extremely well organised.
The multi lingual progeny of immigrants are awesome.
Native English speakers have fallen behind the children of immigrants in GCSE maths and English, government figures show today.
Teenagers who speak English as an additional language have edged ahead of classmates in achieving strong passes (grades nine to five — equivalent to an A* to a high C under the old grading system) in the two core subjects.
This measure was achieved by 43.4 per cent of English speakers and 43.3 per cent of those whose first language was not English in 2018. Last summer 43.2 per cent of native speakers reached this level, a drop of 0.2 percentage points, compared with 43.8 per cent of those for whom English was not their first language, an increase of 0.5 percentage points.
The last 3% aren't in Iowa. They are satellite caucuses held by people who have connections to Iowa (mostly in other parts of the US).
There are also some challenges to some of the people voting in - for example - Van Nuys California, and whether they are eligible to vote in the Iowa caucuses in the first place.
It's a clusterf*ck. Sanders is winning these satellite caucuses, but the people in question may have no right to vote in Iowa.
And yet it kind of doesn't matter (except for those with bets to settle). Sanders and Buttigieg were more or less joint first, everyone else were also-rans. That's a pretty clear verdict.
The problem for Buttigieg (who I should say has done much better than I expected) is that he's bet the farm on the first states, and has little presence in the later ones. He hopes that a string of victories will enable him to bootstrap up in those too, but it's vulnerable to one bad result.
That was what I wrote 36 hours ago!
Ultimately, they both got eleven delegates that count towards the nomination, while Warren got five, and everyone else got none.
Everything turns on NH now. If Buttigieg pulls off a win, or a close 2nd, then things start to look very interesting.
I remain extremely concerned though that self-indulgent Dems are about to do a Corbyn and nominate the Democrat In Name Only.
Tories could not cast stones at anyone given their record and if it had been Tory it would have been a one day suspension at best, or perhaps a days education. Difference is SNP root out their bad ones quickly , no hiding them for a few weeks like Tories do.
what utter bollocks.. no one would have know had it not been for the Scottish Sun.
You thick arsehole, read the post. The SNP chuck bad ones out quickly. It was the boy's mother that discovered it and sold the story to the SUN. If they had known about it he would have been chucked out.
To be fair to the SNP, they did a much better job of disavowing Neale Hanvey at the last GE than any of the other parties did with their candidates accused of indiscretions. Labour and the Lib Dems were still promoting supposed "independents" just before the election, and the Tories still haven't made a proper decision on Sally-Ann Hart, amongst others.
Very fair minded of you, assuming I haven't misread your approximate political loyalties.
Would that be Bill Clinton's party, or that of one of the Georges Bush?
No, it's Donald Trump's party now.
Remember George Bush, Sr. He raised taxes into a recession. He wasn't thanked for it, but it meant US fiscal spending was held down during the 90s, and the government deficit disappeared near the end of the millennium. This meant the US was in a fairly strong fiscal position when the GFC hit.
For most of the last half century, the US has had a better fiscal position than the UK, France and Germany. It's now worse than all of those. When the recession comes (and it will come), the US will end up with debt heading towards Italian levels.
Economist have noticed a "tipping point". At around 120% debt-to-GDP, economic growth is significantly retarded because investors worry that the government won't pay - one way or another. In the US's case, it's a double issue, because those interest payments are being sent overseas. The US is now at 106% of GDP, and rising.
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
"Deferred Gratification" is one of the absolute definers of the middle class.
Both your workers and your toffs can't do it. They have to get straight into whatever is on offer - booze, food, drugs, acrobatic sex, you name it - whereas your middle class type is able to hold off, ask him or herself the question "If I refrain from this now, is it likely to bring me something bigger and better in the future?"
No you are wrong again as you strain to be right the first time. I meant representation for Muslims as in they would have a party elected that prioritised them, not some official body that controls them. A mechanism that gives THEM control. I don’t think they should be ‘controlled’, that’s a figment if your imagination
... and I didn’t say I wasn’t a racist!
There's a Houellebecq novel on this which I've read. A Muslim party achieves power in France and implements Sharia. Quite a tale it is. Personally, I would not wish to see such a party here. Does this make me an Islamophobe? I don't think so. I could still be an Islamophobe. It's just that opposing the concept of a "Muslim Brotherhood" political party in the UK does not make me one. In fact the notion of any political party to represent one particular religion or race is rather troubling to me. Is it even legal in the UK? As regards whether you or anyone else is "a" racist - or the considerably softer drop the noun and go with the adjective "racist" - the most important thing is whether astute observers think you are, not what you yourself think. For example, if you think you aren't racist but astute people think you are, then you are. Conversely, if you think you are racist but astute observers think you aren't, then sure as eggs are eggs you aren't.
Yes, what I meant was that Muslims would eventually, if their share of the population continues to grow at the current rate, obtain some kind of control through democratic representation, be it via a new party or a takeover of a current one. I reckon this would see a fall in Islamic extremism, but a rise in Right wing extremism, with a net result possibly worse than what we have now.
On your second point, it is just silly to self identify as this, that or the other as if people, who probably made their minds up long ago, would take any notice. Along with lengthy twitter bios, it is just a cry for people to see you as you want to be seen, with little resemblance to the truth, and is rather vain to put it mildly. People are desperate for rigid parameters and objective truths, but life is more complicated than that, even for astute observers
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
"Deferred Gratification" is one of the absolute definers of the middle class.
Both your workers and your toffs can't do it. They have to get straight into whatever is on offer - booze, food, drugs, acrobatic sex, you name it - whereas your middle class type is able to hold off, ask him or herself the question "If I refrain from this now, is it likely to bring me something bigger and better in the future?"
Are people middle class because they do deferred gratification, or do they do deferred gratification because they are middle class?
The controversial Thueringen PM elected with AfD support has resigned. As expected, his election triggered a huge wave of support for the Left party (who have otherwise been drifting in the polls), who should do well if there are fresh elections there.
I suspect that the AfD will eventually become regarded as possible local partners, and the Left has been despite their Communist past, but not yet.
What was triggered was more a public outcry against utilizing the votes of the fascists, how much the Linke can benefit in the upcoming early elections is unclear at this point, much will depend on whether Ramelow will be the lead candidate again. On a local (municipal) level the Linke are already well established as a potential partner for the other parties, at least in Eastern Germany, in Western Germany this is still a rare occurance.
The AfD on the other hand will be cemented in their pariah status by the events of the last 24 hours, at least for the foreseeable future. Should they be able to purge themselves of the avowed and unashamed fascists (like their Thuringian subset) there might be a road to cooperation with CDU/FDP, e.g. the more moderate Mecklenburg-Vorpommern AfD state party, but the likelihood of that is rather remote at this point and it would take probably a decade or more to get there.
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
"Deferred Gratification" is one of the absolute definers of the middle class.
Both your workers and your toffs can't do it. They have to get straight into whatever is on offer - booze, food, drugs, acrobatic sex, you name it - whereas your middle class type is able to hold off, ask him or herself the question "If I refrain from this now, is it likely to bring me something bigger and better in the future?"
Isn't as much to do with amounts as self control? If I buy a case of (just to make it clear I'm on the foothills of the middle class range) fairly undistinguished wine, with the best/worst will in the world I'm not going to drink it in a week, whereas your guy with his 40 ouncer of Asda own brand can have it done and dusted in a couple of days, particularly if it's a family affair.
I was never a fan, but would the likes of the only gay in the village, the fat fighter lady or yeah, but no, but yeah girl really not fly today from a PC perspective?
I seemed to remember there was the character that Matt Lucas dressed up as an Thai bridge, which I imagine would go on the no list.
I would have thought Netflix would give them a gig if they really wanted to reprise it.
Every character was an exaggeration of a stereotype, and that kind of humour is not allowed anymore. Best left in the vaults and in the everyday lives of normal people, far from the twittersphere
I was never a fan, but would the likes of the only gay in the village, the fat fighter lady or yeah, but no, but yeah girl really not fly today from a PC perspective?
I seemed to remember there was the character that Matt Lucas dressed up as an Thai bridge, which I imagine would go on the no list.
I would have thought Netflix would give them a gig if they really wanted to reprise it.
Every character was an exaggeration of a stereotype, and that kind of humour is not allowed anymore. Best left in the vaults and in the everyday lives of normal people, far from the twittersphere
Vicky Pollard, "The Only Gay In The Village" and "Computer Says No" were works of genius. Most of the rest, not so much.
Go woke....go broke....get accused of being a massive racist.
Books pulled over 'literary blackface' accusations
The largest bookseller in the US has pulled a new series of "culturally diverse" classic book covers after facing widespread criticism. Barnes and Noble launched the new Diverse Editions on Tuesday, featuring new covers illustrating the main characters as people of colour.
Would that be Bill Clinton's party, or that of one of the Georges Bush?
No, it's Donald Trump's party now.
Remember George Bush, Sr. He raised taxes into a recession. He wasn't thanked for it, but it meant US fiscal spending was held down during the 90s, and the government deficit disappeared near the end of the millennium. This meant the US was in a fairly strong fiscal position when the GFC hit.
For most of the last half century, the US has had a better fiscal position than the UK, France and Germany. It's now worse than all of those. When the recession comes (and it will come), the US will end up with debt heading towards Italian levels.
Economist have noticed a "tipping point". At around 120% debt-to-GDP, economic growth is significantly retarded because investors worry that the government won't pay - one way or another. In the US's case, it's a double issue, because those interest payments are being sent overseas. The US is now at 106% of GDP, and rising.
Indeed. However, Trump isn't responsible as such for accelerating the increase in national debt - it's just ticking upwards at the same rate it has been since the start of the Obama administration. The debt/GDP ratio crossed 100% in 2012 and has been reasonably steady ever since.
Obama's hand was obviously forced by events - I wouldn't argue that Trump should be trying to reduce the problem; the issue is that that's not politically impossible in the US. Threatening to raise taxes makes you functionally unelectable (this theory will be tested to destruction if Sanders/Warren gets the nomination) and it's possible that principle now extends as far as the first derivative of government spending.
In my head, everything is still Alan Greenspan's fault. I don't know how well that theory survives contact with reality, but there you go.
The controversial Thueringen PM elected with AfD support has resigned. As expected, his election triggered a huge wave of support for the Left party (who have otherwise been drifting in the polls), who should do well if there are fresh elections there.
I suspect that the AfD will eventually become regarded as possible local partners, and the Left has been despite their Communist past, but not yet.
What was triggered was more a public outcry against utilizing the votes of the fascists, how much the Linke can benefit in the upcoming early elections is unclear at this point, much will depend on whether Ramelow will be the lead candidate again. On a local (municipal) level the Linke are already well established as a potential partner for the other parties, at least in Eastern Germany, in Western Germany this is still a rare occurance.
The AfD on the other hand will be cemented in their pariah status by the events of the last 24 hours, at least for the foreseeable future. Should they be able to purge themselves of the avowed and unashamed fascists (like their Thuringian subset) there might be a road to cooperation with CDU/FDP, e.g. the more moderate Mecklenburg-Vorpommern AfD state party, but the likelihood of that is rather remote at this point and it would take probably a decade or more to get there.
The problem the CDU have is, unpalatable though the AfD are at the moment they are splitting the vote on the right and thus preventing the usual CDU and FDP centre right coalition from ever having a chance of winning a majority again for the foreseeable future. Merkel may be happy to govern with the SPD or Greens, many of her party and the CSU increasingly are not even if that means dealing with the AfD.
In the UK, the US, Australia, Italy, Austria etc where the right is united and the rightwing parties will govern with each other it is in Government or leading the polls or in Canada or New Zealand the main centre right party won the popular vote even if not most seats. The split on the right in France and Germany and Spain however is proving fatal to chances of a right of centre majority, particularly in the former 2 where Les Republicains and the CDU will not deal with Le Pen's party or the AfD
This is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee that is calling for it.
Watch as Buttigieg wins #2 at a canter by hollowing out Biden, and the Sanders supporters claiming the irregularities were faked to stop their man winning.
This is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee that is calling for it.
It's irrelevant.
Iowa has done what Iowa is supposed to do. It has whittled the number of viable candidates down.
And now it is a question of whether Biden can bounce back in NH, and whether Klobuchar can pull something out of the hat.
Even if Iowa gets rerun as a regular Primary in May, it has still presented the Democratic Party with two viable left wing candidates (Sanders and Warren), and a right wing candidate (Buttigieg).
I was never a fan, but would the likes of the only gay in the village, the fat fighter lady or yeah, but no, but yeah girl really not fly today from a PC perspective?
I seemed to remember there was the character that Matt Lucas dressed up as an Thai bridge, which I imagine would go on the no list.
I would have thought Netflix would give them a gig if they really wanted to reprise it.
Every character was an exaggeration of a stereotype, and that kind of humour is not allowed anymore. Best left in the vaults and in the everyday lives of normal people, far from the twittersphere
Vicky Pollard, "The Only Gay In The Village" and "Computer Says No" were works of genius. Most of the rest, not so much.
Ray McCooney and Marjorie Dawes are two of my favourite comedy characters. The ones you mention never really tickled me. It takes all sorts
This is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee that is calling for it.
Watch as Buttigieg wins #2 at a canter by hollowing out Biden, and the Sanders supporters claiming the irregularities were faked to stop their man winning.
Which is exactly what would happen if it was rerun.
The controversial Thueringen PM elected with AfD support has resigned. As expected, his election triggered a huge wave of support for the Left party (who have otherwise been drifting in the polls), who should do well if there are fresh elections there.
I suspect that the AfD will eventually become regarded as possible local partners, and the Left has been despite their Communist past, but not yet.
What was triggered was more a public outcry against utilizing the votes of the fascists, how much the Linke can benefit in the upcoming early elections is unclear at this point, much will depend on whether Ramelow will be the lead candidate again. On a local (municipal) level the Linke are already well established as a potential partner for the other parties, at least in Eastern Germany, in Western Germany this is still a rare occurance.
The AfD on the other hand will be cemented in their pariah status by the events of the last 24 hours, at least for the foreseeable future. Should they be able to purge themselves of the avowed and unashamed fascists (like their Thuringian subset) there might be a road to cooperation with CDU/FDP, e.g. the more moderate Mecklenburg-Vorpommern AfD state party, but the likelihood of that is rather remote at this point and it would take probably a decade or more to get there.
This puts Pelosi in the shade (though no doubt there were folk saying awful bad manners, consider the office not the areshole in it).
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
"Deferred Gratification" is one of the absolute definers of the middle class.
Both your workers and your toffs can't do it. They have to get straight into whatever is on offer - booze, food, drugs, acrobatic sex, you name it - whereas your middle class type is able to hold off, ask him or herself the question "If I refrain from this now, is it likely to bring me something bigger and better in the future?"
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
"Deferred Gratification" is one of the absolute definers of the middle class.
Ahem. Remind me again which class it was that invented the phrase "wine o'clock" and spend every evening after 8am quietly trollied because drinking wine out of a nice glass every day is somehow not a sign of alcoholism.
This is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee that is calling for it.
It's irrelevant.
Iowa has done what Iowa is supposed to do. It has whittled the number of viable candidates down.
And now it is a question of whether Biden can bounce back in NH, and whether Klobuchar can pull something out of the hat.
Even if Iowa gets rerun as a regular Primary in May, it has still presented the Democratic Party with two viable left wing candidates (Sanders and Warren), and a right wing candidate (Buttigieg).
Cancelling Iowa doesn't turn the clock back.
It matters because it creates the perception that Buttigieg cheated.
And it hasn't whittled the number of viable candidates down, Biden is there, Klobuchar is there, everyone is still in the race. No one has dropped out, and all are continuing like Iowa never happened.
This is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee that is calling for it.
Watch as Buttigieg wins #2 at a canter by hollowing out Biden, and the Sanders supporters claiming the irregularities were faked to stop their man winning.
Which is exactly what would happen if it was rerun.
And the Berniebackers would claim foul all over again....
For me the implementation of Randian rational self interest is the antithesis of a functioning society. And although i can't argue that Trump has many altruistic qualities I do not think he has the ideological drive to change society only profit from it.
I get you. But my biggest problem with Trump is not his policies but HIM. Him as global role model. I think he's causing huge numbers of people around the world who have a nasty bigoted side to them, a certain meanness of spirit, to feel good about themselves and wallow in it, rather than be ashamed of and fight against this negative aspect of their nature, and work to develop their better side (which everyone has). Just by being there in that position - the highest elected office on the planet - he validates and elevates the worst of human qualities and suppresses the best. It's impossible to measure this in the way of GDP or whatever, but IMO it is massive and far more important. The guy is - quite literally - poisoning us. 4 years of this is bad enough, but 8? No, no no no. This must not happen.
The controversial Thueringen PM elected with AfD support has resigned. As expected, his election triggered a huge wave of support for the Left party (who have otherwise been drifting in the polls), who should do well if there are fresh elections there.
I suspect that the AfD will eventually become regarded as possible local partners, and the Left has been despite their Communist past, but not yet.
What was triggered was more a public outcry against utilizing the votes of the fascists, how much the Linke can benefit in the upcoming early elections is unclear at this point, much will depend on whether Ramelow will be the lead candidate again. On a local (municipal) level the Linke are already well established as a potential partner for the other parties, at least in Eastern Germany, in Western Germany this is still a rare occurance.
The AfD on the other hand will be cemented in their pariah status by the events of the last 24 hours, at least for the foreseeable future. Should they be able to purge themselves of the avowed and unashamed fascists (like their Thuringian subset) there might be a road to cooperation with CDU/FDP, e.g. the more moderate Mecklenburg-Vorpommern AfD state party, but the likelihood of that is rather remote at this point and it would take probably a decade or more to get there.
Many thanks for the informed update - you obviously know the scene better than any of us. (I gather Ramelow has said he wants another shot at it - the party would surely be insane not to agree as he's their one big vote-winner.)
I wonder if we might see an evolution like in Sweden, where the conservatives even handed over government to the social democrats rather than depend on Sweden Democrat votes, but some years later have softened their line - partly because the SD made an effort to shed its ex-Nazi past.
Away from our meanderings, fascinating developments in Thuringia as the FDP leader chosen as Prime Minister in the Regional Government has stepped down having discovered (apparently) he was voted in with AfD and CDU support. Merkel has slapped down the local CDU so it looks as though there could be fresh elections.
Hamburg votes on February 23rd - since the last provincial election the SPD are down 12 to 34% - that is scarcely believable, that would be like Labour polling 40% in Newham. The CDU are down two to 14% and the Greens have advanced 15 to 27% and a clear second place.
The current SPD-Green coalition has 73 of the 121 seats in the local parliament so that may not change very much though the balance (59 SPD to 14 Green) will perhaps move to more like 40-35.
For me the implementation of Randian rational self interest is the antithesis of a functioning society. And although i can't argue that Trump has many altruistic qualities I do not think he has the ideological drive to change society only profit from it.
I get you. But my biggest problem with Trump is not his policies but HIM. Him as global role model. I think he's causing huge numbers of people around the world who have a nasty bigoted side to them, a certain meanness of spirit, to feel good about themselves and wallow in it, rather than be ashamed of and fight against this negative aspect of their nature, and work to develop their better side (which everyone has). Just by being there in that position - the highest elected office on the planet - he validates and elevates the worst of human qualities and suppresses the best. It's impossible to measure this in the way of GDP or whatever, but IMO it is massive and far more important. The guy is - quite literally - poisoning us. 4 years of this is bad enough, but 8? No, no no no. This must not happen.
Ahem. Remind me again which class it was that invented the phrase "wine o'clock" and spend every evening after 8am quietly trollied because drinking wine out of a nice glass every day is somehow not a sign of alcoholism.
I was never a fan, but would the likes of the only gay in the village, the fat fighter lady or yeah, but no, but yeah girl really not fly today from a PC perspective?
I seemed to remember there was the character that Matt Lucas dressed up as an Thai bridge, which I imagine would go on the no list.
I would have thought Netflix would give them a gig if they really wanted to reprise it.
Every character was an exaggeration of a stereotype, and that kind of humour is not allowed anymore. Best left in the vaults and in the everyday lives of normal people, far from the twittersphere
Vicky Pollard, "The Only Gay In The Village" and "Computer Says No" were works of genius. Most of the rest, not so much.
Skit Comedy is inherently patchy. Monty Python, Two Ronnies, NTNON, Little Britain, all of them. People only reminisce about the good bits.
I liked the Scottish hotelier, the shopkeeper, Marjorie Dawes too, but Bubbles DeVere, Ting Tong and the vomiting racist ladies were never funny. The best jokes were the more subtle and gentle ones.
Middle Class in the US doesn't really mean the same thing. It really encapsulates working people who have steady jobs often in semi-skilled / skilled roles, so in the UK it would include pretty much all what we call the working class e.g. all your factory / warehouse type workers.
It is a way of referring to a demographic of people who aren't on benefits, but head off to work every day, even for very low wages e.g. we would call working poor, through to normal office type workers.
So it means people in the middle, rather than the top 5%.
Most people in the UK who put their kids through private education* self-identify as middle class.
(* i.e. approximately the richest 7%)
I remember smiling when I read Lord Hailsham's autobiography 'A Sparrow's Flight' (very good, by the way), where he self-defined as middle-class on the basis that he worked for a living i.e. he didn't have an independent income. This despite the fact that his father was a viscount (as he would be), with a house in the country, a seven-bedroom townhouse in London (both with servants), and was sent to Eton.
I have yet to find an improvement on my daughter's definition that she came up with when studying sociology. Middle class people are people who can keep alcohol in their home for more than a week.
Hailsham father’s was a viscount of first creation though. He was a jobbing lawyer who went into politics and rose to become Lord Chancellor (I’m referring to Douglas Hogg, his father, although the description fairly applies to Quintin Hailsham as well)
I don’t think you can use any post Lloyd George peerage as a mark of anything more than someone having made a contribution to public life
Starmer (now 1.21) and Nandy (now 11.5) have both shortened a bit.
Not sure whether this reflects MORI and / or something else?
Best odds according to Oddschecker Starmer 3/10 (Marathon) Long Bailey 56/5 (Betfair X) Nandy 14/1 (Sky Bet) Thornberry 166/1 (Betfair X)
Not sure that that can be correct though. If Marathon really are accepting bets on Starmer at those odds, the market would constitute a significant arb.
No you are wrong again as you strain to be right the first time. I meant representation for Muslims as in they would have a party elected that prioritised them, not some official body that controls them. A mechanism that gives THEM control. I don’t think they should be ‘controlled’, that’s a figment if your imagination
... and I didn’t say I wasn’t a racist!
There's a Houellebecq novel on this which I've read. A Muslim party achieves power in France and implements Sharia. Quite a tale it is. Personally, I would not wish to see such a party here. Does this make me an Islamophobe? I don't think so. I could still be an Islamophobe. It's just that opposing the concept of a "Muslim Brotherhood" political party in the UK does not make me one. In fact the notion of any political party to represent one particular religion or race is rather troubling to me. Is it even legal in the UK? As regards whether you or anyone else is "a" racist - or the considerably softer drop the noun and go with the adjective "racist" - the most important thing is whether astute observers think you are, not what you yourself think. For example, if you think you aren't racist but astute people think you are, then you are. Conversely, if you think you are racist but astute observers think you aren't, then sure as eggs are eggs you aren't.
Yes, what I meant was that Muslims would eventually, if their share of the population continues to grow at the current rate, obtain some kind of control through democratic representation, be it via a new party or a takeover of a current one. I reckon this would see a fall in Islamic extremism, but a rise in Right wing extremism, with a net result possibly worse than what we have now.
On your second point, it is just silly to self identify as this, that or the other as if people, who probably made their minds up long ago, would take any notice. Along with lengthy twitter bios, it is just a cry for people to see you as you want to be seen, with little resemblance to the truth, and is rather vain to put it mildly. People are desperate for rigid parameters and objective truths, but life is more complicated than that, even for astute observers
The flaw in this lies with two assumptions.
1) That the percentage of Muslims continues to increase at something like the present rate. We know that fertility rates are dropping significantly as generations pass.
2) That Muslims are a monolithic group politically. So assuming that Shappi Khorsandi, or TSE are going to vote for Sharia law.
In the primaries, or the general ? In a contest against Trump, I wouldn't even hesitate.
Me neither. And to show that this is not just because my politics are close to people like Sanders and Warren - and hence an easy choice - I would vote for the wackiest of right wing libertarians (assuming they were a decent person) over Trump. Man has to go.
Ayn Rand or Trump the decision of our time. I think I might swing Trump.
No question for me. I hate Trump and am a massive fan of Ayn Rand.
I'd vote for an electable Ayn Rand candidate all day any day.
In the primaries, or the general ? In a contest against Trump, I wouldn't even hesitate.
Me neither. And to show that this is not just because my politics are close to people like Sanders and Warren - and hence an easy choice - I would vote for the wackiest of right wing libertarians (assuming they were a decent person) over Trump. Man has to go.
Ayn Rand or Trump the decision of our time. I think I might swing Trump.
No question for me. I hate Trump and am a massive fan of Ayn Rand.
I'd vote for an electable Ayn Rand candidate all day any day.
The last genuine libertarian Ayn Rand candidate the GOP nominated was Barry Goldwater in 1964 and LBJ trounced him with over 60% of the vote.
An electable Ayn Rand candidate is a contradiction in terms, few voters want social liberalism as well as no welfare state and privatised Medicare
The VI poll has CON 47%, Labour 30%, LD 11%, Greens 5%, BXP 1%.
"But Ms Long-Bailey came in even lower in the eyes of ordinary voters, with just 14 per cent of the public saying she had the makings of a prime minister, and just 27 per cent of Labour supporters. Moreover, only 28 per cent said they were likely to vote Labour if she took charge."
Well, she's Continuity Corbyn with the voters.....
And that's Buttigieg's issue. He needs to win - or at least to come a very close second to Sanders - in NH. And then he needs to perform well again in Nevada.
It's by no means impossible. But it's also far from certain.
For me the implementation of Randian rational self interest is the antithesis of a functioning society. And although i can't argue that Trump has many altruistic qualities I do not think he has the ideological drive to change society only profit from it.
I get you. But my biggest problem with Trump is not his policies but HIM. Him as global role model. I think he's causing huge numbers of people around the world who have a nasty bigoted side to them, a certain meanness of spirit, to feel good about themselves and wallow in it, rather than be ashamed of and fight against this negative aspect of their nature, and work to develop their better side (which everyone has). Just by being there in that position - the highest elected office on the planet - he validates and elevates the worst of human qualities and suppresses the best. It's impossible to measure this in the way of GDP or whatever, but IMO it is massive and far more important. The guy is - quite literally - poisoning us. 4 years of this is bad enough, but 8? No, no no no. This must not happen.
Haha, it's funny how differently people see things. On balance, I'd prefer Trump to lose because he's too stupid and reckless to avoid making decisions that potentially imperil the planet. But the hegemonic authority with which he empowers the right all across the world - while both triggering and cowing the global left at the same time - makes me root for him deep down.
So I'll be happy with the result in November either way
And that's Buttigieg's issue. He needs to win - or at least to come a very close second to Sanders - in NH. And then he needs to perform well again in Nevada.
It's by no means impossible. But it's also far from certain.
Tories could not cast stones at anyone given their record and if it had been Tory it would have been a one day suspension at best, or perhaps a days education. Difference is SNP root out their bad ones quickly , no hiding them for a few weeks like Tories do.
what utter bollocks.. no one would have know had it not been for the Scottish Sun.
You thick arsehole, read the post. The SNP chuck bad ones out quickly. It was the boy's mother that discovered it and sold the story to the SUN. If they had known about it he would have been chucked out.
To be fair to the SNP, they did a much better job of disavowing Neale Hanvey at the last GE than any of the other parties did with their candidates accused of indiscretions. Labour and the Lib Dems were still promoting supposed "independents" just before the election, and the Tories still haven't made a proper decision on Sally-Ann Hart, amongst others.
Very fair minded of you, assuming I haven't misread your approximate political loyalties.
You have not; this is really not an issue where there should be room for partisanship. I am extremely annoyed by Johnson's apparent refusal to discipline his own MPs where necessary.
The controversial Thueringen PM elected with AfD support has resigned. As expected, his election triggered a huge wave of support for the Left party (who have otherwise been drifting in the polls), who should do well if there are fresh elections there.
I suspect that the AfD will eventually become regarded as possible local partners, and the Left has been despite their Communist past, but not yet.
What was triggered was more a public outcry against utilizing the votes of the fascists, how much the Linke can benefit in the upcoming early elections is unclear at this point, much will depend on whether Ramelow will be the lead candidate again. On a local (municipal) level the Linke are already well established as a potential partner for the other parties, at least in Eastern Germany, in Western Germany this is still a rare occurance.
Should they be able to purge themselves of the avowed and unashamed fascists (like their Thuringian subset) there might be a road to cooperation with CDU/FDP, e.g. the more moderate Mecklenburg-Vorpommern AfD state party, but the likelihood of that is rather remote at this point and it would take probably a decade or more to get there.
The problem the CDU have is, unpalatable though the AfD are at the moment they are splitting the vote on the right and thus preventing the usual CDU and FDP centre right coalition from ever having a chance of winning a majority again for the foreseeable future. Merkel may be happy to govern with the SPD or Greens, many of her party and the CSU increasingly are not even if that means dealing with the AfD.
In the UK, the US, Australia, Italy, Austria etc where the right is united and the rightwing parties will govern with each other it is in Government or leading the polls or in Canada or New Zealand the main centre right party won the popular vote even if not most seats. The split on the right in France and Germany and Spain however is proving fatal to chances of a right of centre majority, particularly in the former 2 where Les Republicains and the CDU will not deal with Le Pen's party or the AfD
Broadly correct, except: The frantic right in Italy has just about peaked, in Austria it is in decline, Kurz has gone into coalition with the Greens, in Germany that is the most likely outcome next time around (and more favourable than hypothetical polls indicate).
I'm lacking the insight into France/Spain to make a call on that.
To succeed in middle class land you need to be dependable, moderately intelligent and diplomatic (to those of other classes for various reasons ) .Hence its not so much deferred gratification as taking gratification from 'live improving" environments like education, , challenging non manual jobs,community gatherings (not football matches) and worthy clubs like book clubs or running or golf clubs
A THIRD person has tested positive for coronavirus in the UK after picking up the killer bug in Singapore.
The patient - thought to be the first Brit infected - was diagnosed after falling ill in Brighton and has been transferred to a specialist isolation unit at Guy's Hospital in London.
Makes sense - Singapore has highest infection rate outside China/Japan - and on a per head of population basis, second only to China. I suspect they're also a lot better at diagnosing than some of their neighbours
In the primaries, or the general ? In a contest against Trump, I wouldn't even hesitate.
Me neither. And to show that this is not just because my politics are close to people like Sanders and Warren - and hence an easy choice - I would vote for the wackiest of right wing libertarians (assuming they were a decent person) over Trump. Man has to go.
Ayn Rand or Trump the decision of our time. I think I might swing Trump.
No question for me. I hate Trump and am a massive fan of Ayn Rand.
I'd vote for an electable Ayn Rand candidate all day any day.
Ah, Ayn Rand, the high priestess of selfishness. She posited an ideology that was the exact opposite of Orwell's 1984 but just as evil. The difference was Orwell meant his as a warning, she meant hers as a blueprint.
I always felt that one of the earliest negative influences of the public internet was that Rand's insidious ideology began to spread from the US to the rest of the world. Growing up and going to university in the 70s and 80s, I'd never heard of her (and neither had anyone I knew), except for occasional name-dropping in the more loonier right-wing haunts of American science fiction (Heinlein, Pournelle).
That said, I'd sooner vote for her re-animated corpse than Trump.
And that's Buttigieg's issue. He needs to win - or at least to come a very close second to Sanders - in NH. And then he needs to perform well again in Nevada.
It's by no means impossible. But it's also far from certain.
Monmouth is also out today. See the 538 link I posted earlier. That has it as a tight Sanders-Buttigieg fight.
NH should be a Sanders win, and other than Vermont was his single best Primary* state in 2016.
Buttigieg doesn't have to win NH. But he has to be a long, long way ahead of Biden and the other moderates. That's the only way he can get the momentum needed.
It's a difficult task for him, but not an impossible one.
Comments
Of the 15% who could afford it about half of them - 7% - do it.
https://twitter.com/nate_cohn/status/1225429100363382784
At this rate I have to question not only Hillary's Iowa win, but Obama's and Kerry's (Not that it matters), because it's the first time they actually count votes and are finding all sorts of worms in the can.
There are also some challenges to some of the people voting in - for example - Van Nuys California, and whether they are eligible to vote in the Iowa caucuses in the first place.
It's a clusterf*ck. Sanders is winning these satellite caucuses, but the people in question may have no right to vote in Iowa.
The government in power will be blamed.
It is better that the party that let the US's imbalances get out of control is blamed, rather than the people who took over.
Probably going to go heavily Sanders like the other satellites in Iowa.
(I don't disagree the whole concept of satellites is problematic Democrat 'gerrymandering', but thems the rules.)
What it demonstrates is just how limited is knowledge of the disease progression. He was aware of symptoms a month ago, and has only now succumbed.
We also don’t have much of an idea of what percentage of the actually infected have been identified by the Chinese, and how many others there are.
As it’s now clear the Chinese have identified symptom free carriers who have infected others, it also looks as though going to be very difficult to control any time soon.
The problem for Buttigieg (who I should say has done much better than I expected) is that he's bet the farm on the first states, and has little presence in the later ones. He hopes that a string of victories will enable him to bootstrap up in those too, but it's vulnerable to one bad result.
Ultimately, they both got eleven delegates that count towards the nomination, while Warren got five, and everyone else got none.
The situation is so bad that I'm coming to the point of view that the Iowa Caucus has always been rigged since it's inception, that would explain all the surprise results through it's history.
Never bet on a rigged race unless you are the one who does the rigging.
But in SC, he needs a remarkable improvement.
And he's not got much presence in the Super Tuesday states. It's not terminal. But, as you say, it needs him to run Sanders neck-and-neck in New Hampshire, and to be top two in Nevada. If he stumbles in pretty much any early state, then he loses the aura of success.
And that aura is really all he's got. That and being clearly extremely well organised.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/satellite-caucuses-give-a-surprise-boost-to-sanders-in-iowa/
We may not know the result "for some time".
I remain extremely concerned though that self-indulgent Dems are about to do a Corbyn and nominate the Democrat In Name Only.
Remember George Bush, Sr. He raised taxes into a recession. He wasn't thanked for it, but it meant US fiscal spending was held down during the 90s, and the government deficit disappeared near the end of the millennium. This meant the US was in a fairly strong fiscal position when the GFC hit.
For most of the last half century, the US has had a better fiscal position than the UK, France and Germany. It's now worse than all of those. When the recession comes (and it will come), the US will end up with debt heading towards Italian levels.
Economist have noticed a "tipping point". At around 120% debt-to-GDP, economic growth is significantly retarded because investors worry that the government won't pay - one way or another. In the US's case, it's a double issue, because those interest payments are being sent overseas. The US is now at 106% of GDP, and rising.
Both your workers and your toffs can't do it. They have to get straight into whatever is on offer - booze, food, drugs, acrobatic sex, you name it - whereas your middle class type is able to hold off, ask him or herself the question "If I refrain from this now, is it likely to bring me something bigger and better in the future?"
On your second point, it is just silly to self identify as this, that or the other as if people, who probably made their minds up long ago, would take any notice. Along with lengthy twitter bios, it is just a cry for people to see you as you want to be seen, with little resemblance to the truth, and is rather vain to put it mildly. People are desperate for rigid parameters and objective truths, but life is more complicated than that, even for astute observers
https://twitter.com/TomPerez/status/1225468833458245632
This is the Chair of the Democratic National Committee that is calling for it.
On a local (municipal) level the Linke are already well established as a potential partner for the other parties, at least in Eastern Germany, in Western Germany this is still a rare occurance.
The AfD on the other hand will be cemented in their pariah status by the events of the last 24 hours, at least for the foreseeable future.
Should they be able to purge themselves of the avowed and unashamed fascists (like their Thuringian subset) there might be a road to cooperation with CDU/FDP, e.g. the more moderate Mecklenburg-Vorpommern AfD state party, but the likelihood of that is rather remote at this point and it would take probably a decade or more to get there.
"Mr. Sanders honeymooned in the U.S.S.R. in 1988."
Great. Just great. Four more years of Trump incoming.
go broke....get accused of being a massive racist.Books pulled over 'literary blackface' accusations
The largest bookseller in the US has pulled a new series of "culturally diverse" classic book covers after facing widespread criticism. Barnes and Noble launched the new Diverse Editions on Tuesday, featuring new covers illustrating the main characters as people of colour.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51399355
Obama's hand was obviously forced by events - I wouldn't argue that Trump should be trying to reduce the problem; the issue is that that's not politically impossible in the US. Threatening to raise taxes makes you functionally unelectable (this theory will be tested to destruction if Sanders/Warren gets the nomination) and it's possible that principle now extends as far as the first derivative of government spending.
In my head, everything is still Alan Greenspan's fault. I don't know how well that theory survives contact with reality, but there you go.
In the UK, the US, Australia, Italy, Austria etc where the right is united and the rightwing parties will govern with each other it is in Government or leading the polls or in Canada or New Zealand the main centre right party won the popular vote even if not most seats. The split on the right in France and Germany and Spain however is proving fatal to chances of a right of centre majority, particularly in the former 2 where Les Republicains and the CDU will not deal with Le Pen's party or the AfD
RLB now 12.5. Was approx 6.5 yesterday.
Starmer (now 1.21) and Nandy (now 11.5) have both shortened a bit.
Not sure whether this reflects MORI and / or something else?
Iowa has done what Iowa is supposed to do. It has whittled the number of viable candidates down.
And now it is a question of whether Biden can bounce back in NH, and whether Klobuchar can pull something out of the hat.
Even if Iowa gets rerun as a regular Primary in May, it has still presented the Democratic Party with two viable left wing candidates (Sanders and Warren), and a right wing candidate (Buttigieg).
Cancelling Iowa doesn't turn the clock back.
https://twitter.com/sputnik_TR/status/1225443581223108610?s=20
And it hasn't whittled the number of viable candidates down, Biden is there, Klobuchar is there, everyone is still in the race.
No one has dropped out, and all are continuing like Iowa never happened.
https://twitter.com/UKandEU/status/1225466671420317696?s=20
And Sanders and I could not be further away from each other politically
I wonder if we might see an evolution like in Sweden, where the conservatives even handed over government to the social democrats rather than depend on Sweden Democrat votes, but some years later have softened their line - partly because the SD made an effort to shed its ex-Nazi past.
Hamburg votes on February 23rd - since the last provincial election the SPD are down 12 to 34% - that is scarcely believable, that would be like Labour polling 40% in Newham. The CDU are down two to 14% and the Greens have advanced 15 to 27% and a clear second place.
The current SPD-Green coalition has 73 of the 121 seats in the local parliament so that may not change very much though the balance (59 SPD to 14 Green) will perhaps move to more like 40-35.
One part of it:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-2020-disinformation-war/605530/
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3871594
I liked the Scottish hotelier, the shopkeeper, Marjorie Dawes too, but Bubbles DeVere, Ting Tong and the vomiting racist ladies were never funny. The best jokes were the more subtle and gentle ones.
The other issue is reciprocity. Being able to freely migrate to the EU is a very worthwhile quid pro quo.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1225365994392236032
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rebecca-longbailey-labour-leadership-standard-poll-ipsos-mori-a4355286.html
The VI poll has CON 47%, Labour 30%, LD 11%, Greens 5%, BXP 1%.
I don’t think you can use any post Lloyd George peerage as a mark of anything more than someone having made a contribution to public life
Starmer 3/10 (Marathon)
Long Bailey 56/5 (Betfair X)
Nandy 14/1 (Sky Bet)
Thornberry 166/1 (Betfair X)
Not sure that that can be correct though. If Marathon really are accepting bets on Starmer at those odds, the market would constitute a significant arb.
1) That the percentage of Muslims continues to increase at something like the present rate. We know that fertility rates are dropping significantly as generations pass.
2) That Muslims are a monolithic group politically. So assuming that Shappi Khorsandi, or TSE are going to vote for Sharia law.
I'd vote for an electable Ayn Rand candidate all day any day.
An electable Ayn Rand candidate is a contradiction in terms, few voters want social liberalism as well as no welfare state and privatised Medicare
Well, she's Continuity Corbyn with the voters.....
It's by no means impossible. But it's also far from certain.
So I'll be happy with the result in November either way
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1225271118111662080?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1225274580660604928?s=20
Broadly correct, except: The frantic right in Italy has just about peaked, in Austria it is in decline, Kurz has gone into coalition with the Greens, in Germany that is the most likely outcome next time around (and more favourable than hypothetical polls indicate).
I'm lacking the insight into France/Spain to make a call on that.
The patient - thought to be the first Brit infected - was diagnosed after falling ill in Brighton and has been transferred to a specialist isolation unit at Guy's Hospital in London.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10906274/coronavirus-uk-third-patient-positive/
Makes sense - Singapore has highest infection rate outside China/Japan - and on a per head of population basis, second only to China. I suspect they're also a lot better at diagnosing than some of their neighbours
I always felt that one of the earliest negative influences of the public internet was that Rand's insidious ideology began to spread from the US to the rest of the world. Growing up and going to university in the 70s and 80s, I'd never heard of her (and neither had anyone I knew), except for occasional name-dropping in the more loonier right-wing haunts of American science fiction (Heinlein, Pournelle).
That said, I'd sooner vote for her re-animated corpse than Trump.
NH should be a Sanders win, and other than Vermont was his single best Primary* state in 2016.
Buttigieg doesn't have to win NH. But he has to be a long, long way ahead of Biden and the other moderates. That's the only way he can get the momentum needed.
It's a difficult task for him, but not an impossible one.
* He did better in some caucuses