Quite something from the man who played Frank N Furter
Tony Blair is Tim Curry?
You are Richard O'Brien and I claim my £5
He always reminds me of him when he grins
Surely the Joker would be more apt?
I always called Blair "Mr Sweaty". When he whipped his jacket off he always seemed to be drenched
Given Blair, it was probably lavender scented water sprayed on with a perfume-woofer through the kind of metal template Costa use to standardise barista ability by a dedicated assistant to give the precise shape of armpit moist-patch demanded by Ali Campbell.
Or am I being too cynical?
You'll be claiming next that he wasn't holding a random coffee mug when he stepped out to speak in front of No. 10.
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
Although worth noting that Trump is not particularly unpopular in Virginia, so could that go the other way?
No chance.
VA is pretty solidly a blue state these days due to the migration of liberal voters to the state for work around DC. NC is a good target for the Democrats too for similar reasons: increasing high-tech employment in places like the Research Triangle is changing the state's demographics to the Democrats' favour.
Also Charlotte is massively booming, bringing in a lot of people from Chicago and New York.
Small sample, but the folk I know in Durham NC are mainly from the NY/New England region who studied at Duke and stayed.
If we imagine the Democrats get a big boost from black turnout, the swing states it would most affect would be Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia. With Georgia being more than the other two. So the Dems winning Georgia and losing Wisconsin is very possible.
I think Florida is very hard to swing. It is a very elderly state and a very Cuban state that will make a socialist on the ticket very dangerous.
Even my superforecasted Dem landslide does not involve them taking Florida.
A Dem Landslide would not be able to overturn a 1.2point deficit?
Looks like the ex-felon refranchisement in FL will stand, at least until November, so that would help the Dems a bit as ex-felons tend to lean Democratic by 2:1.
ETA: Over 10% of Florida's population was disenfranchised for being ex-felons!
Good job for the Republicans that Donald Trump doesn’t live there.
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
Although worth noting that Trump is not particularly unpopular in Virginia, so could that go the other way?
No chance.
VA is pretty solidly a blue state these days due to the migration of liberal voters to the state for work around DC. NC is a good target for the Democrats too for similar reasons: increasing high-tech employment in places like the Research Triangle is changing the state's demographics to the Democrats' favour.
Also Charlotte is massively booming, bringing in a lot of people from Chicago and New York.
For some US banks, Charlotte is pretty important. I know of at least two that run some key operations out of there instead of Manhattan.
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
Although worth noting that Trump is not particularly unpopular in Virginia, so could that go the other way?
No chance.
VA is pretty solidly a blue state these days due to the migration of liberal voters to the state for work around DC. NC is a good target for the Democrats too for similar reasons: increasing high-tech employment in places like the Research Triangle is changing the state's demographics to the Democrats' favour.
Yes, when I was there last year those in the south of the state talk about north Virginia as if it’s a different state.
Sanders is garbage - Corbyns old man with more swivelly eyes.
He will lose very badly.
I agree, but the Dems are probably going to lose anyway and at least with Sanders they will lose with a pure ideology. As the Presidency is winner-takes-all, unlike our Parliamentary system, it doesn't matter if they lose by one seat in the electoral college or 300. Unlike in Britain, where a hung Parliament is a very different proposition from a government with a majority of 100. (Though in practice, it's more complicated than that, given the coattails effect that Presidential elections have on Congressional ones in the same year).
In fact, a huge defeat under Sanders in November might have a silver lining for the leadership if it results in more realistic centrism in the party.
Having now experienced 4 defeats in a row in this country, with the prospect of a 5th very likely unless the Labour Party proves capable of getting its act together, I have absolutely no time for those who argue that it is better to stick rigidly to far left principles and lose, rather than compromise to a degree and win, whether that's in the UK or US.
In any case, whether he is favourite or not, the 2020 election is not nailed on for Trump.
What is a Cobra meeting meant to do that isn't already happening? We could do with fewer of these pointless political stunts, not more. It's rain, and a lot of it, but it's not some bolt from the blue national emergency that requires some top-level quick thinking.
Sanders is garbage - Corbyns old man with more swivelly eyes.
He will lose very badly.
I agree, but the Dems are probably going to lose anyway and at least with Sanders they will lose with a pure ideology. As the Presidency is winner-takes-all, unlike our Parliamentary system, it doesn't matter if they lose by one seat in the electoral college or 300. Unlike in Britain, where a hung Parliament is a very different proposition from a government with a majority of 100. (Though in practice, it's more complicated than that, given the coattails effect that Presidential elections have on Congressional ones in the same year).
In fact, a huge defeat under Sanders in November might have a silver lining for the leadership if it results in more realistic centrism in the party.
Having now experienced 4 defeats in a row in this country, with the prospect of a 5th very likely unless the Labour Party proves capable of getting its act together, I have absolutely no time for those who argue that it is better to stick rigidly to far left principles and lose, rather than compromise to a degree and win, whether that's in the UK or US.
In any case, whether he is favourite or not, the 2020 election is not nailed on for Trump.
Bloomberg now out to 6.2, Buttigeig in to 8. They were 5 and 11 this morning.
Must admit I think the market has picked the wrong possible replacement for Bloomberg. If Bloomberg was hurt last night then Biden is best placed to come 2nd a Super Tuesday. He was even pretty good at the debate, too.
What is a Cobra meeting meant to do that isn't already happening? We could do with fewer of these pointless political stunts, not more. It's rain, and a lot of it, but it's not some bolt from the blue national emergency that requires some top-level quick thinking.
And finally, Trehafod is in the Rhondda, Wales.
Flood management is devolved.
The National Assembly for Wales generally has legislative competence in relation to all aspects of flood risk management, coastal protection and land drainage.
So, if Corby is complaining about the readiness or response in Wales, he need to talk to the leader of the party that has been in power in Wales since 1999.
Some polls have Sanders as the most popular Democrat and beating Trump. He could be worth a shot in case Trump screws up disastrously or dies or something and none of the other candidates are exactly brilliant.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
Yep, the current US economy is pretty scary, and if Sanders gets in then the house of cards collapses then it will re-toxify the socialist tag in the US for the next few decades.
However the average person doesn't really look into or understand that, all they see and feel is that the economy doing well and paypackets are rising. An incumbent vs someone promising radical change when people are on the whole doing pretty well is not a good matchup for the radical.
Sounds like the @rcs1000 offering that it would be preferable for Trump to get a 2nd term so that it all goes pop on his watch. I get this, but my aversion to him is too strong to go along with it.
And the argument that the public does not have the intellectual tools or the moral compass to either spot or care that a politician is trashing the public finances to buy personal electoral success now at the price of penury for others in the future - this if true (which it might be) is a very strong argument that there must be a better way of choosing a government than having it decided by universal suffrage.
The publc didn't spot or care that Gordon Brown was trashing the public finances to buy personal electoral success in 2005 leading to penury after inevitably a recession hit us.
Some polls have Sanders as the most popular Democrat and beating Trump. He could be worth a shot in case Trump screws up disastrously or dies or something and none of the other candidates are exactly brilliant.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
Polls are not infallible oracles. Sanders will lose and lose heavily in a full Presidential election.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Some polls have Sanders as the most popular Democrat and beating Trump. He could be worth a shot in case Trump screws up disastrously or dies or something and none of the other candidates are exactly brilliant.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
A lot of people here feel that the system is no longer working for them, and that the American Dream is dead. Trump was elected because he said that he'd fix that. Sanders says the same, and that Trump has failed to uphold his promises. I think Sanders could beat Trump. He doesn't have the baggage Corbyn had. He's never particularly subscribed to identity politics or left-wing causes like Israel-bashing (he is, after all, Jewish!). He's pretty much his whole career stuck to the simple line that the political/economic system is inherently rigged against the common man or woman, and I think he could win on that.
Some polls have Sanders as the most popular Democrat and beating Trump. He could be worth a shot in case Trump screws up disastrously or dies or something and none of the other candidates are exactly brilliant.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
Polls are not infallible oracles. Sanders will lose and lose heavily in a full Presidential election.
Shush, HYFUD will have a sad if he hears talk like that!
Some polls have Sanders as the most popular Democrat and beating Trump. He could be worth a shot in case Trump screws up disastrously or dies or something and none of the other candidates are exactly brilliant.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
A lot of people here feel that the system is no longer working for them, and that the American Dream is dead. Trump was elected because he said that he'd fix that. Sanders says the same, and that Trump has failed to uphold his promises. I think Sanders could beat Trump. He doesn't have the baggage Corbyn had. He's never particularly subscribed to identity politics or left-wing causes like Israel-bashing (he is, after all, Jewish!). He's pretty much his whole career stuck to the simple line that the political/economic system is inherently rigged against the common man or woman, and I think he could win on that.
I agree. He's not the safest bet, but left populism (or at least left anti-establishmentism) can be electorally potent too. Keep in mind Trump didn't beat Clinton particularly by labelling her an extremist. He labelled her an insider, not on the side of real americans. Sanders has other weaknesses, but he's undeniably solid on this point.
Bloomberg now out to 6.2, Buttigeig in to 8. They were 5 and 11 this morning.
Must admit I think the market has picked the wrong possible replacement for Bloomberg. If Bloomberg was hurt last night then Biden is best placed to come 2nd a Super Tuesday. He was even pretty good at the debate, too.
Biden is crap and his campaign is just a vanity trip. All he has is name recognition and his fundraising has been very poor. When tested against real election results he does far worse than his polling.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Bloomberg now out to 6.2, Buttigeig in to 8. They were 5 and 11 this morning.
Must admit I think the market has picked the wrong possible replacement for Bloomberg. If Bloomberg was hurt last night then Biden is best placed to come 2nd a Super Tuesday. He was even pretty good at the debate, too.
Biden is crap and his campaign is just a vanity trip. All he has is name recognition and his fundraising has been very poor. When tested against real election results he does far worse than his polling.
There have been two states voting so far, both demographically weak for him. It's not been encouraging, but writing him off this early is nuts. We shouldn't extrapolate too confidently from small samples.
Keep in mind that if the 4 early states were reversed (i.e. going SC/NV/NH/IA) then Biden would probably be cruising at the top with his rivals hoping to catch up before Super Tuesday. He's not on course to win right now, but he hasn't run a particularly poor campaign.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
Bloomberg now out to 6.2, Buttigeig in to 8. They were 5 and 11 this morning.
Must admit I think the market has picked the wrong possible replacement for Bloomberg. If Bloomberg was hurt last night then Biden is best placed to come 2nd a Super Tuesday. He was even pretty good at the debate, too.
Biden is crap and his campaign is just a vanity trip. All he has is name recognition and his fundraising has been very poor. When tested against real election results he does far worse than his polling.
There have been two states voting so far, both demographically weak for him. It's not been encouraging, but writing him off this early is nuts. We shouldn't extrapolate too confidently from small samples.
Keep in mind that if the 4 early states were reversed (i.e. going SC/NV/NH/IA) then Biden would probably be cruising at the top with his rivals hoping to catch up before Super Tuesday. He's not on course to win right now, but he hasn't run a particularly poor campaign.
Really?
The more voters see of Biden, the less impressed they were with him. Why would South Carolina be different?
Bloomberg now out to 6.2, Buttigeig in to 8. They were 5 and 11 this morning.
Must admit I think the market has picked the wrong possible replacement for Bloomberg. If Bloomberg was hurt last night then Biden is best placed to come 2nd a Super Tuesday. He was even pretty good at the debate, too.
Biden is crap and his campaign is just a vanity trip. All he has is name recognition and his fundraising has been very poor. When tested against real election results he does far worse than his polling.
There have been two states voting so far, both demographically weak for him. It's not been encouraging, but writing him off this early is nuts. We shouldn't extrapolate too confidently from small samples.
Keep in mind that if the 4 early states were reversed (i.e. going SC/NV/NH/IA) then Biden would probably be cruising at the top with his rivals hoping to catch up before Super Tuesday. He's not on course to win right now, but he hasn't run a particularly poor campaign.
Really?
The more voters see of Biden, the less impressed they were with him. Why would South Carolina be different?
Because they've seen more of the others?
(Seriously though, I agree with Mike. Biden is hopeless and should get out of the race.)
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
I can’t imagine it goes down too well among the tens of thousands of people who who work for Sands in Nevada either.
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
I don't think Iowa will be that easy. Neither will Wisconsin. Pennsylvania will be easier.
The evidence at the midterms was that the Democrats did much, much better in Wisconsin than in Pennsylvania. In Wisconsin, they absolutely smashed it. And the Trump approval ratings there aren't good.
Contrast with Pennsylvania where Trump's approvals are much better.
So, I'm confused at your expectation that Pennsylvania will be easier than Wisconsin.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
The US is one of two countries (the other is Eritrea) that claims the right to tax its citizens.no matter where they live, or keep their money, in the world, and the IRS is pretty damn aggressive about enforcing that right.
Bloomberg now out to 6.2, Buttigeig in to 8. They were 5 and 11 this morning.
Must admit I think the market has picked the wrong possible replacement for Bloomberg. If Bloomberg was hurt last night then Biden is best placed to come 2nd a Super Tuesday. He was even pretty good at the debate, too.
Yep, the people who Bloomberg may lose off the back of last night are naturally more Biden-voting than Buttigieg-voting (it says something that in the last few weeks they switched Biden>Bloomberg and not Biden>Buttigieg in the first place). Not to say Biden's fortunes will miraculously turn around, but the benefit to Buttigieg is likely limited despite having the better performance in the debate.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
The US is one of two countries (the other is Eritrea) that claims the right to tax its citizens.no matter where they live, or keep their money, in the world, and the IRS is pretty damn aggressive about enforcing that right.
Boris Johnson disclaimed US citizenship, apparently for this reason (the decision followed a tax demand).
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
The US is one of two countries (the other is Eritrea) that claims the right to tax its citizens.no matter where they live, or keep their money, in the world, and the IRS is pretty damn aggressive about enforcing that right.
Facing 6% per annum of total wealth being expropriated there might be a fair few who reconsider keeping US citizienship - and more than a few countries includng our own, Ireland and Canada willing to welcome with open arms the very wealthy to take their wealth there instead.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
If Warren doesn’t like it that one billionaire is spending a lot of money to campaign against her, she’s going to love it when several of them start doing it all at the same time!
Mr Adelson is a well-known Republican donor, there’s no way Trump is going to be short of campaign funds if he is running against Sanders or Warren.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
The US is one of two countries (the other is Eritrea) that claims the right to tax its citizens.no matter where they live, or keep their money, in the world, and the IRS is pretty damn aggressive about enforcing that right.
Facing 6% per annum of total wealth being expropriated there might be a fair few who reconsider keeping US citizienship - and more than a few countries includng our own, Ireland and Canada willing to welcome with open arms the very wealthy to take their wealth there instead.
I believe the US also has costs for renouncing citizenship. They could also raise those.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
The US is one of two countries (the other is Eritrea) that claims the right to tax its citizens.no matter where they live, or keep their money, in the world, and the IRS is pretty damn aggressive about enforcing that right.
Facing 6% per annum of total wealth being expropriated there might be a fair few who reconsider keeping US citizienship - and more than a few countries includng our own, Ireland and Canada willing to welcome with open arms the very wealthy to take their wealth there instead.
I believe the US also has costs for renouncing citizenship. They could also raise those.
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Yes, looks too good to be true. Also, is it going to be 6% of his wealth every year? That is going it a bit.
Its absolute insanity. Wealth would flee the USA if that came into effect.
If Warren doesn’t like it that one billionaire is spending a lot of money to campaign against her, she’s going to love it when several of them start doing it all at the same time!
Mr Adelson is a well-known Republican donor, there’s no way Trump is going to be short of campaign funds if he is running against Sanders or Warren.
Trump isn't short of campaign funds.
To be honest, buy Facebook shares, cause their advertising revenue is going to go through the roof this summer/fall
A very handy website, per state trump approval ratings. I think the most important point is how is approval rating is compared to his vote percentage in 2016 (unfortunately not captured on the site).
Interesting, Trump appears to be far enough underwater in IA (6 EVs), MI (16), and WI (10) that the Dems should have little problems flipping them. That would put Trump on 273 so the Dems would only need to flip one more of the states where Trump is marginally underwater: AZ (11 EVs), FL (29), NC (15), OH (18), or PA (20).
I don't think Iowa will be that easy. Neither will Wisconsin. Pennsylvania will be easier.
The evidence at the midterms was that the Democrats did much, much better in Wisconsin than in Pennsylvania. In Wisconsin, they absolutely smashed it. And the Trump approval ratings there aren't good.
Contrast with Pennsylvania where Trump's approvals are much better.
So, I'm confused at your expectation that Pennsylvania will be easier than Wisconsin.
Dems did well because they focused on health care iirc.
This time the candidates are all over the place with their plans. But the strategy is still the best one with right candidate and right policy. Trump's achille's heal is healthcare.
Some polls have Sanders as the most popular Democrat and beating Trump. He could be worth a shot in case Trump screws up disastrously or dies or something and none of the other candidates are exactly brilliant.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
Polls are not infallible oracles. Sanders will lose and lose heavily in a full Presidential election.
Polls are not infallible oracles, but they are better than evidence-free assertions.
We didn't need him to confirm that he was scorched in the debate.
The attacks on Sanders though are interesting, especially his statement that a Sanders nomination guarantees Trump's re election
I agree. It also looks lacking in thought, since his attack on Bernie Sanders earlier in the week was based around Bernie Sanders' contingent support for other hypothetical nominees. He looks hypocritical.
I suspect that Sanders as President would be Bloomberg’s worst outcome
Well, Bloomberg didn't look like a winner last night.
I do not follow (or care about) US politics, but Mr Bloomberg comes across to me as a nasty piece of work.
From what I can gather from the comments on here, the Dems need Sanders to retire or shuffle off this mortal coil so they can lose their fixation with him and select an electable candidate.
Seriously - who is going to vote for a man so old he looks like will die in office?
Norman Tebbit looked like he had died in office a couple of terms back.
(Not for the want of the IRA trying.)
Maggie should have done anything she could to keep Tebbit (he retired to care for his wife). To the extent of making him Minister without portfolio and giving him a 3 or even 2 day week.
What is a Cobra meeting meant to do that isn't already happening? We could do with fewer of these pointless political stunts, not more. It's rain, and a lot of it, but it's not some bolt from the blue national emergency that requires some top-level quick thinking.
It requires dredging is what it requires. Hy, can you not text Boris for us and tell him?
I don't know if that works. I'm naturally sympathetic, but it makes me think "With that sort of money at stake, he can hire some expensive lawyers to dodge it". I may well be too pessimistic, but I wonder if voters won't feel similar scepticism.
Well that's the case with a lot of political promises. I guess it depends on whether even if the voter is sceptical they like the intent behind the promise - I know someone who voted Labour, they say because the broadband policy, even though they said they did not really believe it would be workable. They felt iit showed a good priority, for them at least.
Comments
Small sample, but the folk I know in Durham NC are mainly from the NY/New England region who studied at Duke and stayed.
Oh, sorry, forgot he was acquitted.
In any case, whether he is favourite or not, the 2020 election is not nailed on for Trump.
They were 5 and 11 this morning.
https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1230504059439726592?s=19
Flood management is devolved.
The National Assembly for Wales generally has legislative competence in relation to all aspects of flood risk management, coastal protection and land drainage.
So, if Corby is complaining about the readiness or response in Wales, he need to
talk to the leader of the party that has been in power in Wales since 1999.
A certain Mark Drakeford of the Labour party.
No Teflon Bullshitters (TBs, or Tony Blairs) in sight.
"Antibiotic that kills drug-resistant bacteria discovered through AI "
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/20/antibiotic-that-kills-drug-resistant-bacteria-discovered-through-ai
Keep in mind that if the 4 early states were reversed (i.e. going SC/NV/NH/IA) then Biden would probably be cruising at the top with his rivals hoping to catch up before Super Tuesday. He's not on course to win right now, but he hasn't run a particularly poor campaign.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/20/man-arrested-after-london-mosque-stabbing
The more voters see of Biden, the less impressed they were with him. Why would South Carolina be different?
(Seriously though, I agree with Mike. Biden is hopeless and should get out of the race.)
Contrast with Pennsylvania where Trump's approvals are much better.
So, I'm confused at your expectation that Pennsylvania will be easier than Wisconsin.
Mr Adelson is a well-known Republican donor, there’s no way Trump is going to be short of campaign funds if he is running against Sanders or Warren.
To be honest, buy Facebook shares, cause their advertising revenue is going to go through the roof this summer/fall
This time the candidates are all over the place with their plans. But the strategy is still the best one with right candidate and right policy. Trump's achille's heal is healthcare.
a new Fred