Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » No, don’t look to a non-Trump/Biden winner

SystemSystem Posts: 12,169
edited May 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » No, don’t look to a non-Trump/Biden winner

Unusual things happen. Fringe scenarios occur and outsiders find ways to win races they aren’t even in. Even so, for both Donald Trump and Joe Biden to be odds against to win the 2020 US presidential election when both are their party’s nominee-elect is pretty extraordinary.

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608
    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217
    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    What is the chance of non-Trump, non-Biden?

    Well, start with the actuarial tables, add in a little bit for CV-19, and a small smidgen for scandal, and I'd reckon 4-5% at most.

    So, yes. Buy Trump and Biden and pat yourself on the back.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608
    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
    Even post-Covid injecting bleach Trump will make hay with a brain-dead Biden.

    "His mind is so far gone, he can't even remember he was so corrupt...."
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    Which Democrats are going to be insisting on health checks? Biden is already the defacto leader, he has the delegates, the central party just isn't a very powerful thing.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    When will we find out who the next but one president is (AKA Biden’s running mate)?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
    Even post-Covid injecting bleach Trump will make hay with a brain-dead Biden.

    "His mind is so far gone, he can't even remember he was so corrupt...."
    If Trump's going with a line like that he'd better not lose the debates...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,695
    FPT:
    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,217

    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
    Even post-Covid injecting bleach Trump will make hay with a brain-dead Biden.

    "His mind is so far gone, he can't even remember he was so corrupt...."
    I think, though, that Trump is becoming as toxic in 2020 as Hillary was in 2016.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    Which Democrats are going to be insisting on health checks? Biden is already the defacto leader, he has the delegates, the central party just isn't a very powerful thing.
    Two groups: those who don't want to lose to Trump; and The Money. There may be some overlap...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
    Even post-Covid injecting bleach Trump will make hay with a brain-dead Biden.

    "His mind is so far gone, he can't even remember he was so corrupt...."
    I think, though, that Trump is becoming as toxic in 2020 as Hillary was in 2016.
    You'd hope, but... He can still rally the nation by blaming China. That may be a far more potent issue come November.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    FPT

    On top of population density another factor that looks to be important is "connectivity". How many people travel on the transit systems, how many commuters from outside the city come in, how many flights arrive?

    Once you start looking at it like that the most likely cities to be impacted in the West are London, Paris, New York, Chicago, Milan, Madrid.

    I find comparisons with the Southern Hemisphere quite strange when we have separate flu vaccines for north and south due to the timing differences of flu season. Even if covid19 itself is completely neutral to climate (which seems unlikely), then more people coughing in the northern hemisphere due to other colds would lead to faster spread than the south anyway. And Southern Hemisphere big cities arent as connected and densely populated as northern hemisphere countries.

    Similarly flu and colds in Asia dont tend to show the same seasonality that they do in the West, the article below from 2006 even mentions the 30 degree latitude line as a boundary between the types of flu spread, which was also proposed as the covid19 hotspot back in March.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4007136/
    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3550308

    I am convinced geography is at least as important in policy in this whilst obviously accepting policy is in our control so needs more focus. But it is not reasonable to compare cities and countries with vastly different densities, connectivity and climates.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    The odds might just reflect the fact that for now there are more people wanting to lay Trump or Biden than those wanting to back either of them ?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    What is the chance of non-Trump, non-Biden?

    Well, start with the actuarial tables, add in a little bit for CV-19, and a small smidgen for scandal, and I'd reckon 4-5% at most.

    So, yes. Buy Trump and Biden and pat yourself on the back.
    Well those of us who don’t believe in God have a bit of a problem. My expectation is that one of these 2 will be elected but not serve out their full term.

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    All of the buyers at M&S should have been fired years ago. They are clueless.

    There is a huge market out there for guys 40-70 who want to buy smart, top quality yet slightly edgy clothing. In "wiry", "stout", "stocky" and "barrel-chested" fittings. These are people with money but nowhere obvious to spend it on their clothes.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,653

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    Could not agree more.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    There was a period under Clinton when some of those structural problems looked like they were being addressed, specifically when he was facing impeachment. The deficit was being brought under control, Medicaid was being refinanced, social security being put on a sounder footing etc.

    Since then it’s been pretty grim. Obama in particular was a disappointment, proving a great speech maker but a highly ineffectual executive. GWB was embarrassing and some around him positively malignant. The professional class have been incredibly greedy and trickle down a fantasy. There is a lot of ruin in a nation but America is working hard at it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    A very long winded yet elegant way of saying, ‘America’s fucked, and so are the rest of us.’
  • NerysHughesNerysHughes Posts: 3,375

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    All of the buyers at M&S should have been fired years ago. They are clueless.

    There is a huge market out there for guys 40-70 who want to buy smart, top quality yet slightly edgy clothing. In "wiry", "stout", "stocky" and "barrel-chested" fittings. These are people with money but nowhere obvious to spend it on their clothes.
    My favourite size is xxl slim fit
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
    Who in their right mind thinks Biden can run the USA Corporation? He's the guy to take on post-Covid China? The guy to make a hundred quick fire decisions a day? To stand up to Putin? The [insert CIA's assessment of the latest person in charge in North Korea]?

    No, I have zero confidence in Biden. And more to the point, I'm not sure how many Americans will have much more come November. "He's up against Trump" is no reason to give him the job.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    tlg86 said:

    When will we find out who the next but one president is (AKA Biden’s running mate)?

    Announcements tend to come a few days before the party conventions. Biden might want to do it earlier in order to add weight to his overall campaign.

    Note that Betfait won't pay out on the nominee or VP markets till the Conventions
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    Yes, at the moment Biden is polling better against an incumbent president than any challenger since Bill Clinton against Bush Senior in Spring 1992.

    There is no reason at all for the Democrats to remove him and if there were an election this week he would win, maybe even win a landslide.

    However, a long way to go yet
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    So what does America need to do?

    Many of the same things as us, I would suggest. It needs to start saving, eliminate its trade deficit, improve its education for the majority, find ways to create social mobility again, bring the vampiric classes of financiers and lawyers back under control, invest in infrastructure, reduce inequality, bring alienated communities back into the mainstream. It’s an obvious list. The candidates on offer seem to not even recognise the problem.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    I think you need to drop Ford from the list of first termers who lost. Ford had not won a presidential election either as Pres or Vice-Pres. On top of that the GOP was still quite tarnished by Nixon's actions.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
    Who in their right mind thinks Biden can run the USA Corporation? He's the guy to take on post-Covid China? The guy to make a hundred quick fire decisions a day? To stand up to Putin? The [insert CIA's assessment of the latest person in charge in North Korea]?


    No, I have zero confidence in Biden. And more to the point, I'm not sure
    how many Americans will have much more come November. "He's up against Trump" is no reason to give him the job.
    Well it is a reason.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
    The last one to try was Archie Norman the former CEO of Asda.

    I grew up in Tunbridge Wells and met him several times as he was my MP, he was very sharp but not hugely charismatic and although he was in Willliam Hague's Shadow Cabinet he backed Portillo in 2001 and returned to business after he lost and is currently chairman of ITV
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    DavidL said:

    So what does America need to do?

    Many of the same things as us, I would suggest. It needs to start saving, eliminate its trade deficit, improve its education for the majority, find ways to create social mobility again, bring the vampiric classes of financiers and lawyers back under control, invest in infrastructure, reduce inequality, bring alienated communities back into the mainstream. It’s an obvious list. The candidates on offer seem to not even recognise the problem.

    It might be an obvious list but it's a good one. And I would add -

    Lose the guns.

    Stop spending ludicrous sums on the military.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    kinabalu said:

    DavidL said:

    So what does America need to do?

    Many of the same things as us, I would suggest. It needs to start saving, eliminate its trade deficit, improve its education for the majority, find ways to create social mobility again, bring the vampiric classes of financiers and lawyers back under control, invest in infrastructure, reduce inequality, bring alienated communities back into the mainstream. It’s an obvious list. The candidates on offer seem to not even recognise the problem.

    It might be an obvious list but it's a good one. And I would add -

    Lose the guns.

    Stop spending ludicrous sums on the military.
    Yep. No disagreement on those either.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
    Who in their right mind thinks Biden can run the USA Corporation? He's the guy to take on post-Covid China? The guy to make a hundred quick fire decisions a day? To stand up to Putin? The [insert CIA's assessment of the latest person in charge in North Korea]?

    No, I have zero confidence in Biden. And more to the point, I'm not sure how many Americans will have much more come November. "He's up against Trump" is no reason to give him the job.
    Yes it is.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,434
    I think layers of Trump are missing the possibility of the election not being free and fair. It's easy to be cynical about this and point to the chads in 2000, gerrymandering, and various vote suppression efforts over the years and to conclude that it's priced in to the baseline of previous elections.

    I think it's worth reminding yourself what this President is like, the sorts of people he praises and the actions they take.

    In a dispute between armed fascists and anyone who isn't wearing Trump merchandise, Trump supports the fascists. The very good people. If these people protest "election fraud" on voting day in strongly Democrat precincts, how many votes does Biden lose as a result?

    These people believe that the Democrats would need to steal the election to defeat Trump. They won't watch it happen. Fascists don't peacefully sit by while their opponents vote against them.

    After the fact Republicans will argue that turnout was depressed by fear of the virus, or because Biden was a poor candidate, to minimise the effect of violence preventing people from voting. The election will have been stolen and it will be too late to do anything about it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    DavidL said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
    Who in their right mind thinks Biden can run the USA Corporation? He's the guy to take on post-Covid China? The guy to make a hundred quick fire decisions a day? To stand up to Putin? The [insert CIA's assessment of the latest person in charge in North Korea]?


    No, I have zero confidence in Biden. And more to the point, I'm not sure
    how many Americans will have much more come November. "He's up against Trump" is no reason to give him the job.
    Well it is a reason.
    By that logic, you could give it to Sarah Palin.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    The Democrats picked the candidate best able to appeal to the rustbelt and white working class and beat Trump.

    Last time they picked a CEO ie Hillary and left electability to one side, they lost
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    There was a period under Clinton when some of those structural problems looked like they were being addressed, specifically when he was facing impeachment. The deficit was being brought under control, Medicaid was being refinanced, social security being put on a sounder footing etc.

    Since then it’s been pretty grim. Obama in particular was a disappointment, proving a great speech maker but a highly ineffectual executive. GWB was embarrassing and some around him positively malignant. The professional class have been incredibly greedy and trickle down a fantasy. There is a lot of ruin in a nation but America is working hard at it.
    Obamacare was a very considerable achievement - especially in the context of a partisan Congress.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    All of the buyers at M&S should have been fired years ago. They are clueless.

    There is a huge market out there for guys 40-70 who want to buy smart, top quality yet slightly edgy clothing. In "wiry", "stout", "stocky" and "barrel-chested" fittings. These are people with money but nowhere obvious to spend it on their clothes.
    My favourite size is xxl slim fit
    Have a cake. Have 2.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    You wear shirts with a collar AND short sleeves? That's an odd image.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,052

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    In fairness to nineteenth century Presidents, it's difficult to be great when the federal government consists of a few judges and the Post Office. Much easier to amaze when you're dealing with a Civil War or Great Depression or something.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    edited May 2020
    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    All of the buyers at M&S should have been fired years ago. They are clueless.

    There is a huge market out there for guys 40-70 who want to buy smart, top quality yet slightly edgy clothing. In "wiry", "stout", "stocky" and "barrel-chested" fittings. These are people with money but nowhere obvious to spend it on their clothes.
    Take your point, Mark, but 60 is surely the absolute cut-off for "slightly edgy" clothing. After that it has to be Chums and Cotton Traders.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.

    Last
    week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    You wear shirts with a collar AND short sleeves? That's an odd image.
    My pal used to call them dentist shirts. Not in a good way.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,464
    edited May 2020
    O/t, but is Priti going to do the Presser this afternoon? Need to decide whether to send out for popcorn.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Sound header, thanks David.

    Pretty much agree with it all. Biden has shown this season that he is underestimated and on occasion written off by the commentators and pundits.

    I am however, on a few Hail Mary bets, as David calls them. Haley or Whitmer or Stacey Abrams are big pay days for me.

    My most 'bonkers' bet though is Rice at 1000/1
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
    Even post-Covid injecting bleach Trump will make hay with a brain-dead Biden.

    "His mind is so far gone, he can't even remember he was so corrupt...."
    I think, though, that Trump is becoming as toxic in 2020 as Hillary was in 2016.
    You'd hope, but... He can still rally the nation by blaming China. That may be a far more potent issue come November.
    Try to win re-election by whipping the nation into a frenzy of sinophobia?

    Trump wouldn't do a dreadful thing like that surely?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    I think you will find the French had quite a lot to do with the loss of the 13 colonies.

    The financial implications of the French intervention eventually led to Calonne’s famous advice to the French King - ‘Your Majesty, I am afraid there is no money left.’*

    Had it been left to the Americans on their own, they might have struggled.

    *No that’s not exactly what he said, but it’s a great line. I’ve always thought so ever since Laws Byrned Liam over it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    You wear shirts with a collar AND short sleeves? That's an odd image.
    Yes. I call it my Cotton House look.
  • Fishing said:

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    In fairness to nineteenth century Presidents, it's difficult to be great when the federal government consists of a few judges and the Post Office. Much easier to amaze when you're dealing with a Civil War or Great Depression or something.
    There were big challenges. Sadly, they were handled poorly. It would've been interesting to see what an even good president would have done with Reconstruction or the rise of the Gilded Age plutocracy.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    Excellent article David.

    I went back in against Clinton last night and dropped two big ones against her.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    British punters are a bit shite at US politics. It was Rubio last time.

    Actually, not just US politics: there was that weird Andrea Leadsom love-in last year during the Tory leadership contest that was never satisfactorily explained either.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Excellent article David.

    I went back in against Clinton last night and dropped two big ones against her.

    TMI...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    I think you will find the French had quite a lot to do with the loss of the 13 colonies.

    The financial implications of the French intervention eventually led to Calonne’s famous advice to the French King - ‘Your Majesty, I am afraid there is no money left.’*

    Had it been left to the Americans on their own, they might have struggled.

    *No that’s not exactly what he said, but it’s a great line. I’ve always thought so ever since Laws Byrned Liam over it.
    Bloody French, eh? First they come over here and colonise this country then they have their dastardly way with America.

    Still, at the end of it we are left with Brits and Yanks. Both of whom have agency today.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    He only has to survive another 16 weeks for the convention though.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    edited May 2020
    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    I think you will find the French had quite a lot to do with the loss of the 13 colonies.

    The financial implications of the French intervention eventually led to Calonne’s famous advice to the French King - ‘Your Majesty, I am afraid there is no money left.’*

    Had it been left to the Americans on their own, they might have struggled.

    *No that’s not exactly what he said, but it’s a great line. I’ve always thought so ever since Laws Byrned Liam over it.
    Bloody French, eh? First they come over here and colonise this country then they have their dastardly way with America.

    Still, at the end of it we are left with Brits and Yanks. Both of whom have agency today.
    Norman is more aggressive than a Frenchman...

    That doesn’t quite work, but never mind. I will still get my coat.

    Have a good morning.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    ydoethur said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    I think you will find the French had quite a lot to do with the loss of the 13 colonies.

    The financial implications of the French intervention eventually led to Calonne’s famous advice to the French King - ‘Your Majesty, I am afraid there is no money left.’*

    Had it been left to the Americans on their own, they might have struggled.

    *No that’s not exactly what he said, but it’s a great line. I’ve always thought so ever since Laws Byrned Liam over it.
    Bloody French, eh? First they come over here and colonise this country then they have their dastardly way with America.

    Still, at the end of it we are left with Brits and Yanks. Both of whom have agency today.
    Norman is more aggressive than a Frenchman...

    That doesn’t quite work, but never mind. I will still get my coat.

    Have a good morning.
    A bientot.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,357
    Someone we know moonlighting as Sean perhaps
    sean thomas knox
    @thomasknox
    ·
    4m
    So here’s a thing. In late January I became obsessed with Corona after a personal brush. Read everything. By mid Feb I was convinced a pandemic/lockdown was coming our way. So I ordered my first masks. See below. If I could see this coming in mid-Feb, why couldn’t the government?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    America is where we were in the 1900s - we realised then we could no longer exericse global superpower alone: we therefore started to ally with nations like France, and later Japan and Russia (sort of) and then started using multilateralism in the 1920s and beyond to contain the ambitions of others.

    America is already there but hasn't realised it yet. The next 10-20 years will be a wake-up call as it recongises it needs to work in alliance right across the West to not just leverage its influence and power effectively, but also to defend its values and way of life at home.

    I'm expecting the development of new forums and institutions and possibly NATO changing into GTO.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    I think 9 November 2020 is the day the world will wake up and find that the Covid 19 nightmare has passed. Mark it in your diary.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    I would have thought that a (basically dead) candidate would suit the Democrats perfectly.
    Even post-Covid injecting bleach Trump will make hay with a brain-dead Biden.

    "His mind is so far gone, he can't even remember he was so corrupt...."
    I think, though, that Trump is becoming as toxic in 2020 as Hillary was in 2016.
    Interesting post.

    They both fed off each other. For a Trump, you need a Hillary. Without a Hillary, you don't need a Trump.

    Someone needs to drain the poison out of politics for it to return to sanity.

    Biden has made a good start by simply not insulting a quarter of the US electorate as deplorable.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    I'm not touching Biden; there is a very material risk that his health prevents him from sealing that "formality" of becoming the candidate.

    We won't see anything of the intensive behind the scenes medical checks the Democrats are going to insist upon before the Convention. Ask yourself this: if you were headhunting the post of CEO of a FTSE 100 company, would you appoint Biden, having heard what he has said in the media in recent months? Let's face it, he wouldn't get on the long list.

    How many politicians would? Not sure many of the UK lot would be capable, off the top of my head Sunak, Hunt and D Miliband spring to mind. To be fair, not many FTSE100 CEOs would make good party politicians either.
    Who in their right mind thinks Biden can run the USA Corporation? He's the guy to take on post-Covid China? The guy to make a hundred quick fire decisions a day? To stand up to Putin? The [insert CIA's assessment of the latest person in charge in North Korea]?


    No, I have zero confidence in Biden. And more to the point, I'm not sure
    how many Americans will have much more come November. "He's up against Trump" is no reason to give him the job.
    Well it is a reason.
    By that logic, you could give it to Sarah Palin.
    A distinct improvement. For anybody worse you are pretty much looking at the population of high security institutions - and even then not all of them.

    PS: With all this TV re-run of snooker classics going on, I wonder when they will show the best of all - the 2006 Crucible final between Dotty and Ebo? Talk about an antidote to lockdown if that is aired soup to nuts.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    They look great and aren't bad value.

    But they don't last. Build-quality is poor. My Tyrwhitt shirts and suits have never lasted longer than 2 years.

    TM Lewin? M&S? Gieves & Hawkes? Turnbull & Asser?

    They go the full mile, and some.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    malcolmg said:

    Someone we know moonlighting as Sean perhaps
    sean thomas knox
    @thomasknox
    ·
    4m
    So here’s a thing. In late January I became obsessed with Corona after a personal brush. Read everything. By mid Feb I was convinced a pandemic/lockdown was coming our way. So I ordered my first masks. See below. If I could see this coming in mid-Feb, why couldn’t the government?

    Remarkably like @Eadric’s experience.

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533
    Pretty much agree with David, though I don't think the polls are unambiguously bad for Trump - I expect the US will be recovering by November, and the "we're through the worst, don't screw up now" line is quote strong. Latest poll is a tie:

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html

    O/T: pedant's corner - the headline makes it appear that Palin's neighbour set fire to Palin's house before rescuing him in remorse:

    https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2020/may/02/sir-michael-palin-tells-how-elderly-neighbour-rescued-him-after-setting-house-ablaze
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    By the way, it's nice to have some betting headers and posts on here again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,149

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    Turnbull & Asset, if you can afford it.
    My working assumption is that most clothing is made at the same factory by child slaves and different labels put on,
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    America is where we were in the 1900s - we realised then we could no longer exericse global superpower alone: we therefore started to ally with nations like France, and later Japan and Russia (sort of) and then started using multilateralism in the 1920s and beyond to contain the ambitions of others.

    America is already there but hasn't realised it yet. The next 10-20 years will be a wake-up call as it recongises it needs to work in alliance right across the West to not just leverage its influence and power effectively, but also to defend its values and way of life at home.

    I'm expecting the development of new forums and institutions and possibly NATO changing into GTO.
    Hmm not quite sure. In the 1900s we were just gearing up for a war no one really knows for why. It was the apogee of our hubris. It was the war which changed things.

    The US remains totally dominant globally. China may or may not decide to wake up from a hegemonic perspective (imo probably not; it's more interested in protecting its own integrity, including Taiwan, the Spratlys, rather than making new claims) although it will of course continue to grow economically.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    We might have ended up with a House of Commons dominated by gun totting Americans.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    We might have ended up with a House of Commons dominated by gun totting Americans.

    V funny typo.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    I made, with far less lucidity, a similar point last night. Biden is too big. And then I did not place a bet. There are no good choices and prices around 5/4 for several months' wait are not that appealing even if it should be 4/6. There is still horseracing (behind closed doors) in America so if you want that sort of price without the wait...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    We might have ended up with a House of Commons dominated by gun totting Americans.


    V funny typo.
    What’s a T between friends?

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    Someone we know moonlighting as Sean perhaps
    sean thomas knox
    @thomasknox
    ·
    4m
    So here’s a thing. In late January I became obsessed with Corona after a personal brush. Read everything. By mid Feb I was convinced a pandemic/lockdown was coming our way. So I ordered my first masks. See below. If I could see this coming in mid-Feb, why couldn’t the government?

    Remarkably like @Eadric’s experience.

    There are seven billion people in the world. You'd expect two people somewhere to have had the same experience. More really. This coincidence proves nothing. ;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    America is where we were in the 1900s - we realised then we could no longer exericse global superpower alone: we therefore started to ally with nations like France, and later Japan and Russia (sort of) and then started using multilateralism in the 1920s and beyond to contain the ambitions of others.

    America is already there but hasn't realised it yet. The next 10-20 years will be a wake-up call as it recongises it needs to work in alliance right across the West to not just leverage its influence and power effectively, but also to defend its values and way of life at home.

    I'm expecting the development of new forums and institutions and possibly NATO changing into GTO.
    Indeed unlike the last half century of US dominance, certainly after the USSR broke up, the 21st century will see 3 big superpowers, the US, China and India and the US will need broader alliances and to reach out to India to contain China as well as shore up NATO to contain Putin and Russia.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    Clearly and indisputably correct, why is this market so wrong?

    I think that it’s depression. People just cannot believe that the choice can be so bad. America needs something better. God will provide. Or something.
    America’s transformation into a world power coincided with an extended period of at best second rate presidents (Lincoln aside). The structural problems the USA has now go far deeper than the presidency and the poor quality of the candidates is a symptom not a cause of its ills.
    America is where we were in the 1900s - we realised then we could no longer exericse global superpower alone: we therefore started to ally with nations like France, and later Japan and Russia (sort of) and then started using multilateralism in the 1920s and beyond to contain the ambitions of others.

    America is already there but hasn't realised it yet. The next 10-20 years will be a wake-up call as it recongises it needs to work in alliance right across the West to not just leverage its influence and power effectively, but also to defend its values and way of life at home.

    I'm expecting the development of new forums and institutions and possibly NATO changing into GTO.
    Hmm not quite sure. In the 1900s we were just gearing up for a war no one really knows for why. It was the apogee of our hubris. It was the war which changed things.

    The US remains totally dominant globally. China may or may not decide to wake up from a hegemonic perspective (imo probably not; it's more interested in protecting its own integrity, including Taiwan, the Spratlys, rather than making new claims) although it will of course continue to grow economically.
    I think it's the other way round. There was fear of a war but that was born out of the economic and political competition from newly rising powers.

    Sound familiar?

    I don't think the US is quite as dominant as we suppose (it's not the 1990s anymore) and the events of the Trump presidency of what happens when America tries to do it solely alone have shown the consequences of that.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488
    kle4 said:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    Turnbull & Asset, if you can afford it.
    My working assumption is that most clothing is made at the same factory by child slaves and different labels put on,
    I don't think that's the case for T&A.

    The shirts are handmade in England, with a pricetag to prove it.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    We might have ended up with a House of Commons dominated by gun totting Americans.

    If America had not declared independence, London would not be running the show. We'd be where Scotland is now because the money and power would have gradually shifted west.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,357
    DavidL said:

    malcolmg said:

    Someone we know moonlighting as Sean perhaps
    sean thomas knox
    @thomasknox
    ·
    4m
    So here’s a thing. In late January I became obsessed with Corona after a personal brush. Read everything. By mid Feb I was convinced a pandemic/lockdown was coming our way. So I ordered my first masks. See below. If I could see this coming in mid-Feb, why couldn’t the government?

    Remarkably like @Eadric’s experience.

    Amazing
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    edited May 2020

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    If America had not declared independence and we had kept India, the British Empire would be the dominant superpower still
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    China deliberately suppressed or destroyed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak in an “assault on international transparency’’ that cost tens of thousands of lives, according to a dossier prepared by concerned Western governments on the COVID-19 contagion.

    https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/coronavirus/bombshell-dossier-lays-out-case-against-chinese-bat-virus-program/news-story/55add857058731c9c71c0e96ad17da60
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Good header but I prefer to lay Trump than back Biden. Reason is simple - I give him little chance against whoever the Dem candidate ends up being. He looks unelectable now to me.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,357

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677



    I'm expecting the development of new forums and institutions and possibly NATO changing into GTO.

    NATO is now a bit on the side at best for the US. The main strategic effort of the US military is now focused toward a war in the Pacific with China hence their interest in platforms like B-21 and PGS which have very limited applicability in a European theatre.

    They are already preparing for a post-NATO, isolated future with JADC2 which integrates every sensor, weapon and platform from the Army, USAF and USN into one multi-domain network and there is NO connectivity into it for coalition 'partners'. What comes after NATO for the US won't be another treaty organisation. They will do strong but separate bilateral defence agreements with subservient partner nations (eg Canada and Australia) with whom they share strategic interests.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    We might have ended up with a House of Commons dominated by gun totting Americans.

    If America had not declared independence, London would not be running the show. We'd be where Scotland is now because the money and power would have gradually shifted west.
    Money and power yes. HQ not necessarily so.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929

    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    They look great and aren't bad value.

    But they don't last. Build-quality is poor. My Tyrwhitt shirts and suits have never lasted longer than 2 years.

    TM Lewin? M&S? Gieves & Hawkes? Turnbull & Asser?

    They go the full mile, and some.
    The great advantage of Tyrwhitt for us freaks is there is a limited amount of cheap and easy made-to-measureness or at least crude adjustment of leg and sleeve length. If I were reincarnated I'd come back in an off-the-peg size.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,533

    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    They look great and aren't bad value.

    But they don't last. Build-quality is poor. My Tyrwhitt shirts and suits have never lasted longer than 2 years.

    TM Lewin? M&S? Gieves & Hawkes? Turnbull & Asser?

    They go the full mile, and some.
    I've experimented with suits from a hand-made one with three fittings by a serious tailor for £700 (20 years ago) to an off-the-hangar one from Tesco for £25. The former was a complete waste of money (as I had suspected, but wanted to try it once in a moment of self-indulgence) - fitted OK, looked good, wore out in about 5 years. The latter was fantastic value - fitted OK, looked good, wore out in about 4 years. Did either of them use dodgy back-room labour? Who knows? - a Fair Trade suits initiative would be a good idea.

    The tailor-made guy still has my number and at the height of the pandemic WhatsApped me "Now is a great time to think about a new suit!" Some people never give up.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    kinabalu said:

    Good header but I prefer to lay Trump than back Biden. Reason is simple - I give him little chance against whoever the Dem candidate ends up being. He looks unelectable now to me.

    I disagree, his base is still strong, it is Biden giving the Democrats a chance with white working class rustbelt voters and independents and improving likely black turnout in the South.

    He is the best candidate the Democrats could have picked to beat Trump
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226

    I think 9 November 2020 is the day the world will wake up and find that the Covid 19 nightmare has passed. Mark it in your diary.

    Sounds spot on. I will mark on my Sir Cliff kitchen calendar.

    For those interested, his November picture is circa 95 when he would have been in his mid-fifties. A fallow period, truth be told, with no big hits. Looks OK though. He is reclining against a fence in jeans, checked shirt, cowboy boots. Not smiling. It's a rather moody shot.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    We might have ended up with a House of Commons dominated by gun totting Americans.

    If America had not declared independence, London would not be running the show. We'd be where Scotland is now because the money and power would have gradually shifted west.
    Money and power yes. HQ not necessarily so.
    Yes London would definitely be the premier world city still, not New York
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929

    I think layers of Trump are missing the possibility of the election not being free and fair. It's easy to be cynical about this and point to the chads in 2000, gerrymandering, and various vote suppression efforts over the years and to conclude that it's priced in to the baseline of previous elections.

    I think it's worth reminding yourself what this President is like, the sorts of people he praises and the actions they take.

    In a dispute between armed fascists and anyone who isn't wearing Trump merchandise, Trump supports the fascists. The very good people. If these people protest "election fraud" on voting day in strongly Democrat precincts, how many votes does Biden lose as a result?

    These people believe that the Democrats would need to steal the election to defeat Trump. They won't watch it happen. Fascists don't peacefully sit by while their opponents vote against them.

    After the fact Republicans will argue that turnout was depressed by fear of the virus, or because Biden was a poor candidate, to minimise the effect of violence preventing people from voting. The election will have been stolen and it will be too late to do anything about it.

    It is not just Trump. The whole GOP seems to be corrupt, or at least corrupted. Winning is all that counts. Core beliefs that swing on a sixpence when control of the White House changes. Gerrymandering, voter suppression and worse. The end justifies the means. My great fear is we will follow. Actually, no, my fear is that we are following.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Good header but I prefer to lay Trump than back Biden. Reason is simple - I give him little chance against whoever the Dem candidate ends up being. He looks unelectable now to me.

    I disagree, his base is still strong, it is Biden giving the Democrats a chance with white working class rustbelt voters and independents and improving likely black turnout in the South.

    He is the best candidate the Democrats could have picked to beat Trump
    I know you think that. And we probably won't be able to test who is right because it likely WILL be Trump v Biden - whereby we agree Biden has a great chance.

    However - and please note this for the record - there still is a way in that event to judge who is calling this better. Because I predict not just a Trump loss but also that it will NOT be close.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    edited May 2020

    TOPPING said:

    FPT:

    EPG said:

    Apart from the label could anyone tell the difference between a Lewin and Tyrwhitt shirt?

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1256381257052815360?s=20

    They are each mehn's shirts with emphasis on the meh. M&S is the place to go.
    I have to disagree. M&S is a f*cking disaster these days for shirts. Great if you want tailored, skinny, slim or extra slim fit, but if you want 'normal' fit forget it.

    Plus they don't even put the shirts in collar size order on the stores these days.

    Charles Tyrwhitt provide a great service imo, especially if you pick up one of their '4 shirts for' offers which I always do.
    Last week I bought four Charles Tyrwhitt shirts for £20 each. Delivered three days later. Non iron cotton poplin short sleeves. Perfect for your home office.
    They look great and aren't bad value.

    But they don't last. Build-quality is poor. My Tyrwhitt shirts and suits have never lasted longer than 2 years.

    TM Lewin? M&S? Gieves & Hawkes? Turnbull & Asser?

    They go the full mile, and some.
    I've experimented with suits from a hand-made one with three fittings by a serious tailor for £700 (20 years ago) to an off-the-hangar one from Tesco for £25. The former was a complete waste of money (as I had suspected, but wanted to try it once in a moment of self-indulgence) - fitted OK, looked good, wore out in about 5 years. The latter was fantastic value - fitted OK, looked good, wore out in about 4 years. Did either of them use dodgy back-room labour? Who knows? - a Fair Trade suits initiative would be a good idea.

    The tailor-made guy still has my number and at the height of the pandemic WhatsApped me "Now is a great time to think about a new suit!" Some people never give up.
    Nick 20 years ago a decent suit would have cost you at least two grand. £700 was a discount guy. Give it another go now at a proper place and you won't be disappointed. Price has gone up of course.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Betfair have set the precedent that if either fall ill then the market will be suspended and potentially voided.

    That is another reason why I am betting on the winning party market not next president.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,482
    America ceasing to be World hegemon is not really a bad thing. I think everyone fears it because the status quo is that one power is utterly dominant, and they assume that mantle will simply pass to China. It won't. America will still exist and be very powerful, it just won't be able to act with impunity anywhere in the world as it has been. There will be America, China, Russia, whatever Europe morphs into, and a panoply of smaller nations like the UK. That's not a bad thing.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    malcolmg said:

    Someone we know moonlighting as Sean perhaps
    sean thomas knox
    @thomasknox
    ·
    4m
    So here’s a thing. In late January I became obsessed with Corona after a personal brush. Read everything. By mid Feb I was convinced a pandemic/lockdown was coming our way. So I ordered my first masks. See below. If I could see this coming in mid-Feb, why couldn’t the government?

    This is a silly argument as well. I bought my first N95 masks in late January (and have the Amazon records to prove it!), then set about spending a fairly obscene amount of money to make sure that my family and I were essentially equipped for siege.

    Whilst it would of course have been wonderful for the Government to have shown equivalent foresight and proactivity, I'm in no way surprised or even disappointed that they didn't. There's a reason why 'moving at the speed of government' exists as an expression and not in a complimentary sense. It's one of the philosophical reasons why I'm a conservative and a libertarian - the individual will in many cases be able to act more quickly, flexibly, and intelligently in their own interests that any government could.

    Plus governments quite rightly have to look at the big picture, balancing individual outcomes versus those of the country as a whole. An epidemiologist or an economist who thinks in terms of the survival of an individual as opposed to that of thousands or millions is simply not doing their job properly - they're like the planners in Dr. Strangelove who consult books called 'Global Casualties in Megadeaths'.

    TL;DR: Governments generally do no fail to adequately care for the individual because they are evil or incompetent (though they may be both): they fail to do so _because they are governments_.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,149
    malcolmg said:

    TOPPING said:

    I'm just happy that we are so easily able to solve all the problems of our former colony. I'm sure many regret we let it go in the first place.

    Oh wait. They took it from us. And currently their administration is a reflection of a great many Americans. Just as ours is.

    It's not Trump it's the American people and they are entitled to elect whoever they damn well want. Assured, perhaps, that the smug Brits will be there with them. To criticise and make snide observations.

    Edit: God bless America.

    If American hadn't declared independence, where would it have ended up?

    Obviously, self-governance would have continued to be a thing (as it was to an extent even at the point of revolution, and in all other settler colonies) so I'm inclined to think it'd have been a much bigger and richer Canada.

    However, what would its size and boundaries have been? How would it have developed?

    No-one knows.
    Being under the yoke it would have suffered similar fate to Scotland, being held back and treated like crap whilst being milked dry..
    Theyd certainly develop a chip on their shoulder...
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    malcolmg said:

    Someone we know moonlighting as Sean perhaps
    sean thomas knox
    @thomasknox
    ·
    4m
    So here’s a thing. In late January I became obsessed with Corona after a personal brush. Read everything. By mid Feb I was convinced a pandemic/lockdown was coming our way. So I ordered my first masks. See below. If I could see this coming in mid-Feb, why couldn’t the government?

    This is a silly argument as well. I bought my first N95 masks in late January (and have the Amazon records to prove it!), then set about spending a fairly obscene amount of money to make sure that my family and I were essentially equipped for siege.

    Whilst it would of course have been wonderful for the Government to have shown equivalent foresight and proactivity, I'm in no way surprised or even disappointed that they didn't. There's a reason why 'moving at the speed of government' exists as an expression and not in a complimentary sense. It's one of the philosophical reasons why I'm a conservative and a libertarian - the individual will in many cases be able to act more quickly, flexibly, and intelligently in their own interests that any government could.

    Plus governments quite rightly have to look at the big picture, balancing individual outcomes versus those of the country as a whole. An epidemiologist or an economist who thinks in terms of the survival of an individual as opposed to that of thousands or millions is simply not doing their job properly - they're like the planners in Dr. Strangelove who consult books called 'Global Casualties in Megadeaths'.

    TL;DR: Governments generally do no fail to adequately care for the individual because they are evil or incompetent (though they may be both): they fail to do so _because they are governments_.
    Good post.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,488

    America ceasing to be World hegemon is not really a bad thing. I think everyone fears it because the status quo is that one power is utterly dominant, and they assume that mantle will simply pass to China. It won't. America will still exist and be very powerful, it just won't be able to act with impunity anywhere in the world as it has been. There will be America, China, Russia, whatever Europe morphs into, and a panoply of smaller nations like the UK. That's not a bad thing.

    When it no longer is we'll be desperate to return to the good old days when they were.

    China on top will make America look like a cuddly teddy bear.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    Dura_Ace said:



    I'm expecting the development of new forums and institutions and possibly NATO changing into GTO.

    NATO is now a bit on the side at best for the US. The main strategic effort of the US military is now focused toward a war in the Pacific with China hence their interest in platforms like B-21 and PGS which have very limited applicability in a European theatre.

    They are already preparing for a post-NATO, isolated future with JADC2 which integrates every sensor, weapon and platform from the Army, USAF and USN into one multi-domain network and there is NO connectivity into it for coalition 'partners'. What comes after NATO for the US won't be another treaty organisation. They will do strong but separate bilateral defence agreements with subservient partner nations (eg Canada and Australia) with whom they share strategic interests.

    Maybe. But think back to the second world war when what we were sold as America agreeing to Churchill's Europe-first policy was nothing of the sort. It was Europe and Japan simultaneously; equal but different. The point is that the requirements for the two theatres are almost completely different and not really in competition with each other. Army and air force for Europe. Aircraft carriers and marines for the Pacific.

    Once the isolationist, pro-Russia, anti-China Trump is replaced, even four years from now, it would not be surprising if America reverts back.
This discussion has been closed.