Americans - how big a worry are the riots in Portland and Seattle at the moment? What I've seen on Twitter looks awful, but Twitter is not known for its balance or sense of proportion.
Re the tale I told FPT re: congressman getting some tail in his DC office, note that the other congressman who observed this intra-office "exchange" also found himself with a significant zipper problem - and one that ended his political career.
During Mike Lowry's first and only term as Governor of Washington, he was accused of sexual harassment by a young women who was a senior aide in his administration. When he did NOT deny the charge, and instead agreed to settle out of court, his poll (pun intended) numbers fell to the vanishing point.
Lowry was NOT helped by the fact that the State Police observed him getting a blowjob in a car from another "staffer" who was apparently eager to "serve" the Governor.
Root (pun again intended) of Lowry's trouble was alcoholism. When I first got to WA State, he was a hero to liberal Democrats in general and enviros in particular.
Indeed, the latter were so smitten that, even after his fall from grace as Gov, they ran him for Commissioner of Public Lands, a statewide elective position in charge of state natural resources dept. The (utterly predictable) result was he not only LOST the Democratic nomination, but helped to elect a Republican COL.
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
I'd like to see the USA leading the free world. Trump doesn't really give the impression of doing that. I worry about what will become of European-American alliances with both sides looking increasinly unenthusiastic. Good news for Russia, bad news for those for whom good news for Russia is bad news. Mind you, he was right about China when no-one else was.
Americans - how big a worry are the riots in Portland and Seattle at the moment? What I've seen on Twitter looks awful, but Twitter is not known for its balance or sense of proportion.
Portland is worse than Seattle. The impact on voters in both cities has been similar: more voters are mad at the cops - and Trumpsky & his agents provaceteur - than at BLM or even the lunatic fringe.
Suburban voters in PDX & SEA environs are also trending this way. However, there MAY be a bit of a backlash among exurban & rural voters.
Note that both Oregon & Washington are solid for Biden-Harris. IMHO, only truly contested congressional race in these two states is WA CD03, currently held by incumbent Republican Jaime Herrera Beutler, who is being challenged for 2nd time running by Carolyn Long.
August 2020 primary results were encouraging for JHB, and disappointing for Long. However, this is in part due to turnout differential that favored GOP due to lack of any serious Democratic challenge to incumbent Gov. Jay Inslee as opposed to a host of contenders for GOP.
As predicted (or rather foreordained) Inslee was 1st place in field of over three dozen candidates. Second in Top Two primary was anti-gun control activist Loren Culp, who pulled out a substantial rural, rightwing vote.
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
Apart from needing to lose, surely the Trump/Boris parallels are closer.
Trump is closer to Farage than Boris, though yes Sanders was the US Corbyn
Think that is unfair to Bernie, whom yours truly did NOT support this year (though did in 2016, in hopes of sending Hilary a message). For all his faults, Sanders was NEVER a hard-left, hard-edged ideologue a la Corbyn.
Indeed, as mayor of Burlington, Vermont, he was one democratic socialist who worked well with the local chamber of commerce. Not ALL the time, but more times than you might think.
He's closer to the late John Smith than the politically dead Jeremy Corbyn.
Americans - how big a worry are the riots in Portland and Seattle at the moment? What I've seen on Twitter looks awful, but Twitter is not known for its balance or sense of proportion.
Portland is worse than Seattle. The impact on voters in both cities has been similar: more voters are mad at the cops - and Trumpsky & his agents provaceteur - than at BLM or even the lunatic fringe.
Suburban voters in PDX & SEA environs are also trending this way. However, there MAY be a bit of a backlash among exurban & rural voters.
Note that both Oregon & Washington are solid for Biden-Harris. IMHO, only truly contested congressional race in these two states is WA CD03, currently held by incumbent Republican Jaime Herrera Beutler, who is being challenged for 2nd time running by Carolyn Long.
August 2020 primary results were encouraging for JHB, and disappointing for Long. However, this is in part due to turnout differential that favored GOP due to lack of any serious Democratic challenge to incumbent Gov. Jay Inslee as opposed to a host of contenders for GOP.
As predicted (or rather foreordained) Inslee was 1st place in field of over three dozen candidates. Second in Top Two primary was anti-gun control activist Loren Culp, who pulled out a substantial rural, rightwing vote.
Thanks SSI - are the cops in Portland (and Seattle) really that bad - that even after weeks of rioting and destruction public sympathy is with the rioters? From the perspective of someone who's never been there, both gave the impression of fairly peaceful cities where not much bad happened. Again, should emphasise that I have little knowledge of what is actually going on!
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
So you think having a US president who is a Putinst tool is NOT affecting the rest of the world???
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
So you think having a US president who is a Putinst tool is NOT affecting the rest of the world???
Has he invaded or bombed any new countries? No.
It is up to Europe to spend more on its own defence v Putin
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
Yes, well, all that ammonium nitrate didn't really affect Beirut either. Until it did.
And a second term Trump will know he can get away with it, and won't be constrained by thoughts of getting reelected in 2024. Or alternatively, will be constrained by thoughts of getting reelected in 2024.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
Nah not Johnson's fault, can't be his fault. He is blameless.
They're all to blame. It's a government-wide failure.
There really was no way of this not happening once you decide education can just stop. It was a ludicrous decision to treat education as non-essential. The fact that most of Europe were doing the same doesn't make it any better.
While we're flinging the blame around, I'd also note that the teaching unions seemed adamant that this was the right approach. I think the universities were also on board.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to come
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to cone8
Another sweeping statement. I am not sure, unless they can keep cheap credit lines running to the next election and beyond, the incumbent government are going to be able to explain away post-Covid economic armageddon.
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to come
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to cone8
Another sweeping statement. I am not sure, unless they can keep cheap credit lines running to the next election and beyond, the incumbent government are going to be able to explain away post-Covid economic armageddon.
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
It isn't even in recession English voters will vote for the Tories over a centre left Labour opposition as they did in February 1974 and 1992.
Without Scotland Labour will almost certainly never win again regardless of economic circumstance without a Blairite leader and certainly not be in any longer than 1 term e.g. after 1945 the Tories won in England in 1950 and after 1966 the Tories won in 1970
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to cone8
Another sweeping statement. I am not sure, unless they can keep cheap credit lines running to the next election and beyond, the incumbent government are going to be able to explain away post-Covid economic armageddon.
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
It isn't even in recession English voters will vote for the Tories over a centre left Labour opposition as they did in 1974 and 1992.
Without Scotland Labour will almost certainly never win again regardless of economic circumstance without a Blairite leader and certainly not be in any longer than 1 term e.g. after 1945 the Tories won in England in 1950 and after 1966 the Tories won in 1970
They did not do that in 1974 - and I suspect had Thatcher still been Tory leader they would not have done so in 1992.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to come
Not true in 2005 - 2001 - 1997 - 1966 - nor 1945.
66% of those under Blair, so Labour have only won twice since WW2 in England without Blair as leader.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to come
Not true in 2005 - 2001 - 1997 - 1966 - nor 1945.
66% of those under Blair, so Labour have only won twice since WW2 in England without Blair as leader.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to cone8
Another sweeping statement. I am not sure, unless they can keep cheap credit lines running to the next election and beyond, the incumbent government are going to be able to explain away post-Covid economic armageddon.
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
It isn't even in recession English voters will vote for the Tories over a centre left Labour opposition as they did in 1974 and 1992.
Without Scotland Labour will almost certainly never win again regardless of economic circumstance without a Blairite leader and certainly not be in any longer than 1 term e.g. after 1945 the Tories won in England in 1950 and after 1966 the Tories won in 1970
They did not do that in 1974 - and I suspect had Thatcher still been Tory leader they would not have done so in 1992.
Wrong, Heath won a majority of English seats in February 1974.
Wilson only became PM in 1964 and February 1974 thanks to Scottish MPs
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to cone8
Another sweeping statement. I am not sure, unless they can keep cheap credit lines running to the next election and beyond, the incumbent government are going to be able to explain away post-Covid economic armageddon.
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
It isn't even in recession English voters will vote for the Tories over a centre left Labour opposition as they did in 1974 and 1992.
Without Scotland Labour will almost certainly never win again regardless of economic circumstance without a Blairite leader and certainly not be in any longer than 1 term e.g. after 1945 the Tories won in England in 1950 and after 1966 the Tories won in 1970
They did not do that in 1974 - and I suspect had Thatcher still been Tory leader they would not have done so in 1992.
Wrong, Heath won a majority of English seats in February 1974.
Wilson only became PM in 1964 and February 1974 thanks to Scottish MPs
But Heath did not have a majority in England , Wales & Northern Ireland in Feb 1974.
While the Arizona and Florida numbers are certainly possible, I am very sceptical of the Wisconsin one.
Maybe but as Wisconsin and Florida are the tipping point states if that poll is right the election is literally neck and neck in the Electoral College
These are just my gut feelings, so could be completely wrong:
- Florida now allows ex-felons to vote. These are disproportionately black men. I'm not sure if this will have a big effect on the result, but it probably adds half a point to the Democrats. That said, Florida was a very poor result for the Dems in 2018. Why should 2020 be any better?
- Trump's approval ratings in Wisconsin are worse than in any other battleground state. The Dems did *really* well there in 2018. I can't see it as any thing other than a Dem pickup in 2020.
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to cone8
Another sweeping statement. I am not sure, unless they can keep cheap credit lines running to the next election and beyond, the incumbent government are going to be able to explain away post-Covid economic armageddon.
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
It isn't even in recession English voters will vote for the Tories over a centre left Labour opposition as they did in 1974 and 1992.
Without Scotland Labour will almost certainly never win again regardless of economic circumstance without a Blairite leader and certainly not be in any longer than 1 term e.g. after 1945 the Tories won in England in 1950 and after 1966 the Tories won in 1970
They did not do that in 1974 - and I suspect had Thatcher still been Tory leader they would not have done so in 1992.
Wrong, Heath won a majority of English seats in February 1974.
Wilson only became PM in 1964 and February 1974 thanks to Scottish MPs
But Heath did not have a majority in England , Wales & Northern Ireland in Feb 1974.
Heath had a majority in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in February 1974 once you combined Tory and Ulster Unionist MPs
Labour needs to win back voters who have switched to the SNP. That will not be achieved by teaming up with the Tories! Labour needs to maximise the difference with the Tories.
No they do not as the SNP will support a Labour PM over the Tories at UK level.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to come
Not true in 2005 - 2001 - 1997 - 1966 - nor 1945.
66% of those under Blair, so Labour have only won twice since WW2 in England without Blair as leader.
Another way of putting it is that *all* of Labour's leaders who won elections since the war achieved an English majority at least once.
- Florida now allows ex-felons to vote. These are disproportionately black men. I'm not sure if this will have a big effect on the result, but it probably adds half a point to the Democrats.
Slightly old data (and for current felons not ex-) but:
There seem to be barely more black people than white people in prison in Florida. They're *disproportionately* black compared to the Florida population. However, I imagine the white people are disproportionately low-education, and low-education white people are a *very* Trumpy demographic - maybe not quite as Trumpy as black people are Dem, but still very Trumpy.
There are also Latinos, but IIUC a lot of Florida Latinos are Cuban, who are historically quite GOP.
Add that ex-felons don't vote much even when they're allowed to and I'd be surprised if it nets the Dems as much as half a point.
I give up. A Ladbrokes punter won £150,000 backing horses numbered 10 (his lucky number)
A plucky racing punter has scooped a whopping £150k from backing five horses that were all carrying the No.10 saddlecloth.
The customer placed the 50p each-way five-fold bet on Saturday evening’s racing and is now richer to the tune of £151,488.10.
14/1 shot Mandarian Monarch kicked off the winning No.10 selections in the 18:45 at Tramore, followed by Morrooj (6/1) and Sir Canford (12/1) over at Chepstow.
Trump is America's Corbyn; he needs to lose and lose big.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
I think it's 50/50 at the moment.
50/50 that he loses?
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
Why? Unless you are a Mexican immigrant the Trump presidency has not really affected the rest of the world, certainly not in the way a George W Bush or even Obama presidency did.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
So apart from doing everything to try to ensure the likely destruction of human civilization in the not too distant future he hasn't affected us at all. Top geezer.
While the Arizona and Florida numbers are certainly possible, I am very sceptical of the Wisconsin one.
Maybe but as Wisconsin and Florida are the tipping point states if that poll is right the election is literally neck and neck in the Electoral College
These are just my gut feelings, so could be completely wrong:
- Florida now allows ex-felons to vote. These are disproportionately black men. I'm not sure if this will have a big effect on the result, but it probably adds half a point to the Democrats. That said, Florida was a very poor result for the Dems in 2018. Why should 2020 be any better?
- Trump's approval ratings in Wisconsin are worse than in any other battleground state. The Dems did *really* well there in 2018. I can't see it as any thing other than a Dem pickup in 2020.
Why should Dems do better in Florida? In state with ABOVE average number of seniors - many originally from Northeast US - one word sums it up: COVID
While the Arizona and Florida numbers are certainly possible, I am very sceptical of the Wisconsin one.
Maybe but as Wisconsin and Florida are the tipping point states if that poll is right the election is literally neck and neck in the Electoral College
Hmmm that's a tricky one. What polling is more likely to be righ: this one poll paid for by Trump campaigners showing Wisconsin tied, or all the other polls showing Biden an average of almost 7% ahead.
There's a long way to go, but if the election were tomorrow Biden would almost certainly win.
While the Arizona and Florida numbers are certainly possible, I am very sceptical of the Wisconsin one.
Maybe but as Wisconsin and Florida are the tipping point states if that poll is right the election is literally neck and neck in the Electoral College
These are just my gut feelings, so could be completely wrong:
- Florida now allows ex-felons to vote. These are disproportionately black men. I'm not sure if this will have a big effect on the result, but it probably adds half a point to the Democrats. That said, Florida was a very poor result for the Dems in 2018. Why should 2020 be any better?
- Trump's approval ratings in Wisconsin are worse than in any other battleground state. The Dems did *really* well there in 2018. I can't see it as any thing other than a Dem pickup in 2020.
Why should Dems do better in Florida? In state with ABOVE average number of seniors - many originally from Northeast US - one word sums it up: COVID
The other factor is the increased number of Puerto Ricans in Florida, not keen on Trump at all. I don't think Trump will get 200 EV.
In the unlikely event of Trump getting re elected, he will be hamstrung by a Dem Congress and possibly Senate. He can pack the SCOTUS, but that really affects domestic social issues rather than anything outside the USA. A further Trump presidency will trash America further, but probably won't impact us much.
Comments
Is Trump the real favourite of USA2020?
Congrats on you unexpected fluency in American slang!
Of course in August 1944 "home by Christmas" was the matra west of the Siegfried Line.
He needs to lose so big that it salts the earth for anyone like him going forwards.
Or 50/50 that he loses big?
I would say 40% he loses by a landslide, 40% he loses narrowly, 20% he wins narrowly.
The 20% terrifies me.
During Mike Lowry's first and only term as Governor of Washington, he was accused of sexual harassment by a young women who was a senior aide in his administration. When he did NOT deny the charge, and instead agreed to settle out of court, his poll (pun intended) numbers fell to the vanishing point.
Lowry was NOT helped by the fact that the State Police observed him getting a blowjob in a car from another "staffer" who was apparently eager to "serve" the Governor.
Root (pun again intended) of Lowry's trouble was alcoholism. When I first got to WA State, he was a hero to liberal Democrats in general and enviros in particular.
Indeed, the latter were so smitten that, even after his fall from grace as Gov, they ran him for Commissioner of Public Lands, a statewide elective position in charge of state natural resources dept. The (utterly predictable) result was he not only LOST the Democratic nomination, but helped to elect a Republican COL.
I can understand why liberal Americans hate him and yes he could do more about climate change but beyond that he has not really affected Europe at all
Mind you, he was right about China when no-one else was.
Suburban voters in PDX & SEA environs are also trending this way. However, there MAY be a bit of a backlash among exurban & rural voters.
Note that both Oregon & Washington are solid for Biden-Harris. IMHO, only truly contested congressional race in these two states is WA CD03, currently held by incumbent Republican Jaime Herrera Beutler, who is being challenged for 2nd time running by Carolyn Long.
August 2020 primary results were encouraging for JHB, and disappointing for Long. However, this is in part due to turnout differential that favored GOP due to lack of any serious Democratic challenge to incumbent Gov. Jay Inslee as opposed to a host of contenders for GOP.
As predicted (or rather foreordained) Inslee was 1st place in field of over three dozen candidates. Second in Top Two primary was anti-gun control activist Loren Culp, who pulled out a substantial rural, rightwing vote.
Nah not Johnson's fault, can't be his fault. He is blameless.
Indeed, as mayor of Burlington, Vermont, he was one democratic socialist who worked well with the local chamber of commerce. Not ALL the time, but more times than you might think.
He's closer to the late John Smith than the politically dead Jeremy Corbyn.
Again, should emphasise that I have little knowledge of what is actually going on!
Apparently a good mark for a Trump win is this, so said the Telegraph the other day
It is up to Europe to spend more on its own defence v Putin
https://twitter.com/OliverDowden/status/1295721579813523457?s=19
https://twitter.com/OliverDowden/status/1295821278012678145?s=19
And a second term Trump will know he can get away with it, and won't be constrained by thoughts of getting reelected in 2024. Or alternatively, will be constrained by thoughts of getting reelected in 2024.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-trudeau-prorogues-parliament-until-sept-23-1.5068461
He might do it, but the current odds (which imply a 35-40% chance) look a little skinny to me.
While we're flinging the blame around, I'd also note that the teaching unions seemed adamant that this was the right approach. I think the universities were also on board.
Boris must have an appalling Bradford factor with all his absenses.
However if Labour refuse a Unionist Alliance with the Tories leading to a Nationalist majority at Holyrood, indyref2 and Scottish independence then without Scottish MPs the Tories will dominate Westminster for decades to come
I have the same problem with Trump being saved by his wonder drug for Covid-19 come November. It's the economy.
More for Labour's benefit if anything as without Scotland the Tories will dominate Westminster
Without Scotland Labour will almost certainly never win again regardless of economic circumstance without a Blairite leader and certainly not be in any longer than 1 term e.g. after 1945 the Tories won in England in 1950 and after 1966 the Tories won in 1970
Wilson only became PM in 1964 and February 1974 thanks to Scottish MPs
- Florida now allows ex-felons to vote. These are disproportionately black men. I'm not sure if this will have a big effect on the result, but it probably adds half a point to the Democrats. That said, Florida was a very poor result for the Dems in 2018. Why should 2020 be any better?
- Trump's approval ratings in Wisconsin are worse than in any other battleground state. The Dems did *really* well there in 2018. I can't see it as any thing other than a Dem pickup in 2020.
Polling finished on 4 August. 400 voters across 4 battleground states. 100 per state.
There seem to be barely more black people than white people in prison in Florida. They're *disproportionately* black compared to the Florida population. However, I imagine the white people are disproportionately low-education, and low-education white people are a *very* Trumpy demographic - maybe not quite as Trumpy as black people are Dem, but still very Trumpy.
There are also Latinos, but IIUC a lot of Florida Latinos are Cuban, who are historically quite GOP.
Add that ex-felons don't vote much even when they're allowed to and I'd be surprised if it nets the Dems as much as half a point.
A plucky racing punter has scooped a whopping £150k from backing five horses that were all carrying the No.10 saddlecloth.
The customer placed the 50p each-way five-fold bet on Saturday evening’s racing and is now richer to the tune of £151,488.10.
14/1 shot Mandarian Monarch kicked off the winning No.10 selections in the 18:45 at Tramore, followed by Morrooj (6/1) and Sir Canford (12/1) over at Chepstow.
Fellow No.10 horse in the racecard, Red Vermillion, beat Willie Mullins’ odds-on poke in the 19:45 at Tramore before Das Kapital (14/1) wrapped up proceedings in South Wales, scooping a cool £150k from just £5.
https://news.ladbrokes.com/horse-racing/punter-lands-150k-no-10-horses.html
Going to the Supreme Court? I can’t think of any recent precedents...
There's a long way to go, but if the election were tomorrow Biden would almost certainly win.
In the unlikely event of Trump getting re elected, he will be hamstrung by a Dem Congress and possibly Senate. He can pack the SCOTUS, but that really affects domestic social issues rather than anything outside the USA. A further Trump presidency will trash America further, but probably won't impact us much.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/271637/monthly-trade-balance-of-china/#:~:text=In June 2020, the trade,balance implies a trade deficit.&text=China surpassed the United States,goods trading economy in 2013.