What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
John Gray has a long piece in last week's New Statesman looking at the situation in America. The arrogance of liberals and progressives is a key issue he argues. Trump is a symptom rather than a cause.
The perpetual unwillingness of the right to take responsibility for anything is one of the touchstones of the modern age.
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
You are asking the wrong question. Trump is not a weak candidate, he gets votes in high numbers in places where they matter. He would have done against every potential Democratic candidate.
They actually need to work out why Biden won, and ensure they have that kind of candidate in 2024.
What is remarkable about Biden, for someone who has been around in politics for a long time, is how there aren't any huge negatives that can be thrown at him. The worst the Reps came up with was that he's a bit sleepy, prone to muddled gaffes, and has an apparently dodgy son.
We know from our own politics that pretty much anyone who has been in office for any length of time picks up stuff that can be thrown at them thereafter.
This probably means that Biden isn't going to change the world. But it also indicates that he's a decent guy - excerpts from the historic never-broadcast interview with David Frost are being repeated on R4 and are well worth a listen.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
There have been times in recent weeks when I have been too, but I'm less so now. He's not getting enough support from the Republican establishment.
The ragtag army of overarmed airheads won't be enough to cause more than minor insurrections.
That very much mirrors my own trajectory through this hellscape of an election. The one thing that really helped me, though, was recognising that just because Trump is in other people's heads, he doesn't get to live rent free in my head. I decided that, instead of indulging my fears about Trump's intentions, I would look at what he can actually do. And the answer is very reassuring indeed. He's gone. He can make enough trouble that small numbers of people will die, but it's now a criminal justice matter, not a political or military one. And, to be brutally honest, American violent crime isn't a pressing issue for me in the way that the the presidency and the robustness of US democracy is.
I just hope that he continues flailing just long enough to discredit not only himself but also the Republican establishment in the eyes of at least some who voted for him. I am admittedly assuming that at least a small proportion of the numpties who voted for him are still capable of independent thought, which might be questioned.
I've noticed that the replies to Trump and associates' tweets seem to be skewing increasingly towards opponents rather than "supporters"in recent days. Either his supporters are finally giving up the ghost, or the Russians have called off the bots.
They're all on parler now or whatever it's called?
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
I find @HYUFD to be completely honest. He will stubbornly stand by his argument no matter how irrational it may get, but many are guilty of that. Conversely he will be flexible as the Conservative party amends its position, but he is consistent in that as well even if others like me find it bizarre. Again he is not alone in doing this and is doing it honestly even though it appears contradictory.
The only lack of honesty I see is the habit of amending (or misdescribing) what he has said afterwards, if someone has come up with a valid challenge. He's not unique in that either.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
There have been times in recent weeks when I have been too, but I'm less so now. He's not getting enough support from the Republican establishment.
The ragtag army of overarmed airheads won't be enough to cause more than minor insurrections.
That very much mirrors my own trajectory through this hellscape of an election. The one thing that really helped me, though, was recognising that just because Trump is in other people's heads, he doesn't get to live rent free in my head. I decided that, instead of indulging my fears about Trump's intentions, I would look at what he can actually do. And the answer is very reassuring indeed. He's gone. He can make enough trouble that small numbers of people will die, but it's now a criminal justice matter, not a political or military one. And, to be brutally honest, American violent crime isn't a pressing issue for me in the way that the the presidency and the robustness of US democracy is.
I just hope that he continues flailing just long enough to discredit not only himself but also the Republican establishment in the eyes of at least some who voted for him. I am admittedly assuming that at least a small proportion of the numpties who voted for him are still capable of independent thought, which might be questioned.
I hope he goes away quietly. The Republicans have lost their way over Trump but it's better for America that they find their way back rather make themselves unelectable. The Dems deserve power right now because they are clearly the better of the two parties, but weak opposition won't keep them honest. America needs a sensible and strong Republican Party, not a shrill and weak one.
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
You are asking the wrong question. Trump is not a weak candidate, he gets votes in high numbers in places where they matter. He would have done against every potential Democratic candidate.
They actually need to work out why Biden won, and ensure they have that kind of candidate in 2024.
What is remarkable about Biden, for someone who has been around in politics for a long time, is how there aren't any huge negatives that can be thrown at him. The worst the Reps came up with was that he's a bit sleepy, prone to muddled gaffes, and has an apparently dodgy son.
We know from our own politics that pretty much anyone who has been in office for any length of time picks up stuff that can be thrown at them thereafter.
This probably means that Biden isn't going to change the world. But it also indicates that he's a decent guy - excerpts from the historic never-broadcast interview with David Frost are being repeated on R4 and are well worth a listen.
Well, he did decide that Neil Kinnock was so good rôle model he should put large chunks of his speeches into his own...
When I was 20 I spent a month and a half travelling the US by train. 30+ states visited. East. Middle. West. North. South. America struck me as being like a zoo, where the exhibits in one place were very different to other places. I was struck by just how little travelled some people we met were - surfer dudes who had never left southern California, a bookish teacher who couldn't understand why we had coins that were worth an odd number of cents, a southern gentleman who over breakfast on the train asked if we get etiquette lessons in England as we "eat so dainty" by using a knife AND a fork at the same time.
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
I really don't think so, at all. There's the potential for violence from a few individuals, but I see no prospect of anything on a mass organised scale.
@edmundintokyo did make this point before the election, but what's striking about Trump's coup attempt is how inept and lacking in bottle it is.
When Trump first tweeted "stop the count" after election day he was still ahead in the count in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If his supporters, like those who had postured in the Michigan Capitol in a lockdown protest, had turned up in numbers, armed and determined, they could have stopped those counts. They could have destroyed ballots and made a count impossible.
It didn't happen.
Likewise, the much touted Republican observers who I was worried would intimidate Democrats and prevent them from voting on the day? Didn't happen.
I never thought that Trump himself was attempting to organise these things, but I thought he was creating an atmosphere in which a capable Thomas Cromwell like figure could organise them, or a hothead like William de Tracy would be inspired to act.
I'm sure Trump would have been delighted if someone had demonstrated the competence and determination to orchestrate a coup on his behalf, but that person doesn't yet exist.
They didn't stop the votes from being cast, or counted, so constitutionally that's them done, and the Army lost. Republican Governors have talked with Biden - they're not about to foment rebellion.
Trump is done. But what his shenanigans are doing is keeping the attention of his supporters onto him. It's preventing the Republican party as a whole from moving on.
Hes pretty shameless but a coward. Hed encourage the extremists and defend them afterwards but hed not want to seem to directly call for violence for example.
As all have said it wont matter, but its also just so dumb as seeking to interfere like that will come out.
If getting caught doesn't matter, and it doesn't, it is no longer dumb to intervene directly. It is only dumb to intervene directly if it mattered, which it would have done to every previous PM in my lifetime.
“Talk of ‘beating Covid’ was always nonsense After immersing myself in the science, it’s clear to me that phrases like ‘all-out war’ only scared the nation out of its wits
My reading is that it's more calculating than that.
"So, Mr Hodges. Daniel. Danny. You believe this to be a serious matter. If that were the case, surely there would be a mechanism, a cadre of elite forces to drag me unwillingly from my post, much as [insert classical allusion here, I'm a physics teacher]. There is no such force, you say? But it may harm my electoral prospects? My electoral prospects are of nugatory relevance until the Year of Our Lord 2024. Until then, as I understand The Youth say, jog on. Or as our American friends would no doubt say, "Don't book him, Danno."
As all have said it wont matter, but its also just so dumb as seeking to interfere like that will come out.
If getting caught doesn't matter, and it doesn't, it is no longer dumb to intervene directly. It is only dumb to intervene directly if it mattered, which it would have done to every previous PM in my lifetime.
It doesn't matter in the moment but cumulatively such behaviour adds up to an eventual tipping point with people.
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
You are asking the wrong question. Trump is not a weak candidate, he gets votes in high numbers in places where they matter. He would have done against every potential Democratic candidate.
They actually need to work out why Biden won, and ensure they have that kind of candidate in 2024.
What is remarkable about Biden, for someone who has been around in politics for a long time, is how there aren't any huge negatives that can be thrown at him. The worst the Reps came up with was that he's a bit sleepy, prone to muddled gaffes, and has an apparently dodgy son.
We know from our own politics that pretty much anyone who has been in office for any length of time picks up stuff that can be thrown at them thereafter.
This probably means that Biden isn't going to change the world. But it also indicates that he's a decent guy - excerpts from the historic never-broadcast interview with David Frost are being repeated on R4 and are well worth a listen.
Well, he did decide that Neil Kinnock was so good rôle model he should put large chunks of his speeches into his own...
To be fair, Neil Kinnocks strongest suit was his oratory.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
I find @HYUFD to be completely honest. He will stubbornly stand by his argument no matter how irrational it may get, but many are guilty of that. Conversely he will be flexible as the Conservative party amends its position, but he is consistent in that as well even if others like me find it bizarre. Again he is not alone in doing this and is doing it honestly even though it appears contradictory.
The only lack of honesty I see is the habit of amending (or misdescribing) what he has said afterwards, if someone has come up with a valid challenge. He's not unique in that either.
And not addressing things people say in response.
That is the most frustrating thing. I have addressed this with him several times. However I genuinely think he doesn't get it. I think he thinks he has
As all have said it wont matter, but its also just so dumb as seeking to interfere like that will come out.
If getting caught doesn't matter, and it doesn't, it is no longer dumb to intervene directly. It is only dumb to intervene directly if it mattered, which it would have done to every previous PM in my lifetime.
It doesn't matter in the moment but cumulatively such behaviour adds up to an eventual tipping point with people.
There is not much evidence that is the case. Johnson has acted this way his whole life, so has Trump, there is no sign of a "decent" majority of their own party demanding higher standards of public accountability.
As all have said it wont matter, but its also just so dumb as seeking to interfere like that will come out.
Given how bland the report actually was I'd be surprised if he interfered. What concerns me about the argument is the absolutism - largely on party lines which says once the word bully is used all that should follow must be automatic - regardless of the evidence, background, degree, etc. I used to investigate 'bullying' claims frequently in my previous job. If it taught me anything it was that things are rarely black and white and that each case varied and required different actions. As politics has become more polarised the real victim has been nuance.
For as long as he has the confidence of a sufficient number of his party to give him control of the Commons cabinet Ministers serve at the pleasure of the PM and in what he deems to be the national interest. It seems obvious to me that the Home Office senior civil service have been a source of frustration for a long time. I suspect that Patel was asked in terms to shake things up a bit and to try to change the culture there by Boris. That is what she is trying to do.
From Boris's perspective in challenging, even shouting at, senior officials, Patel was doing what she had been asked to do. He doesn't see much wrong with it. Hence his reluctance to accept that this amounted to bullying and a breach of the Ministerial code. That decision, along with many others, is something to be weighed by the MPs who give him his majority. If they are ok with that, that is the end of the matter.
The Ministerial code is not law. It is guidance and the report of the person appointed to investigate issues under it is an opinion, not a binding decision on the PM of the day. Boris can be criticised for his decision, the hypocrisy of his foreword is exposed, but the only views that ultimately matter are those of the 364 other MPs that form his majority. And so far they seem to be with him.
When I was 20 I spent a month and a half travelling the US by train. 30+ states visited. East. Middle. West. North. South. America struck me as being like a zoo, where the exhibits in one place were very different to other places. I was struck by just how little travelled some people we met were - surfer dudes who had never left southern California, a bookish teacher who couldn't understand why we had coins that were worth an odd number of cents, a southern gentleman who over breakfast on the train asked if we get etiquette lessons in England as we "eat so dainty" by using a knife AND a fork at the same time.
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
So you believe in rights but not inalienable rights?
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
I find @HYUFD to be completely honest. He will stubbornly stand by his argument no matter how irrational it may get, but many are guilty of that. Conversely he will be flexible as the Conservative party amends its position, but he is consistent in that as well even if others like me find it bizarre. Again he is not alone in doing this and is doing it honestly even though it appears contradictory.
My recommendation would be to drill into the "facts" he posts. He often posts things that seem dubious to me, and sometimes, when you find the actual data, he's spot on. But other times you find that he's distorting the truth to just about fit it so some other narrative. And when you go back to the post, you'll see his wording is so very careful as to avoid an outright lie. To me, that shows a level of dishonest presentation that clever lawyers and journalists are so skilled at. And I would argue that nobody is really capable of that level wordsmithery without also knowing that they are offering misleading impressions of the data. But, hey, don't take my word for it. Try it some time, if he's even coming back. You'll see for yourselves.
Roy, you would need to go back in time somewhat here but IanB2 and I spent sometime with him trying to show how irrational some of his arguments were. I even tried converting his statements into logical equations so as to take the opinions out of it and show his arguments were irrational. It was a waste of time.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
When I was 20 I spent a month and a half travelling the US by train. 30+ states visited. East. Middle. West. North. South. America struck me as being like a zoo, where the exhibits in one place were very different to other places. I was struck by just how little travelled some people we met were - surfer dudes who had never left southern California, a bookish teacher who couldn't understand why we had coins that were worth an odd number of cents, a southern gentleman who over breakfast on the train asked if we get etiquette lessons in England as we "eat so dainty" by using a knife AND a fork at the same time.
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
The first bit is certainly true. On my trip last year I met a woman who was telling me how she "loved travelling"; it turned out the furthest she had been was Montana. They get their understanding of "abroad" through TV (which tbf heavily influences our view of the US).
The 'American Dream' is the most successful ever piece of spin; the pinnacle of achievement from the United States of Advertising. Making everyone relaxed about gross inequality.
There's a book called "White Trash" which, despite its title, is actually an academic historical study of the underclasses in the US. From the beginning there was significant inequality, with power and land appropriated by a small number of already wealthy immigrants while vast numbers came over penniless on indentures (leaving black slavery aside, as off topic for the book - except that it did make the point that the existence of slavery meant that those on indentures or in low wage jobs could console themselves with not being bottom of the social pile). Yes, there were some who got free land and some who made themselves in the US, but social and economic mobility was always hugely less than the myths and much film and TV would suggest.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
There have been times in recent weeks when I have been too, but I'm less so now. He's not getting enough support from the Republican establishment.
The ragtag army of overarmed airheads won't be enough to cause more than minor insurrections.
That very much mirrors my own trajectory through this hellscape of an election. The one thing that really helped me, though, was recognising that just because Trump is in other people's heads, he doesn't get to live rent free in my head. I decided that, instead of indulging my fears about Trump's intentions, I would look at what he can actually do. And the answer is very reassuring indeed. He's gone. He can make enough trouble that small numbers of people will die, but it's now a criminal justice matter, not a political or military one. And, to be brutally honest, American violent crime isn't a pressing issue for me in the way that the the presidency and the robustness of US democracy is.
I just hope that he continues flailing just long enough to discredit not only himself but also the Republican establishment in the eyes of at least some who voted for him. I am admittedly assuming that at least a small proportion of the numpties who voted for him are still capable of independent thought, which might be questioned.
I hope he goes away quietly. The Republicans have lost their way over Trump but it's better for America that they find their way back rather make themselves unelectable. The Dems deserve power right now because they are clearly the better of the two parties, but weak opposition won't keep them honest. America needs a sensible and strong Republican Party, not a shrill and weak one.
I largely agree on Trump - but he has allowed by his oddness the left to escape any serious examination of the views of over 70m of their people. They hate their views and would really rather they weren't there. Same thing is happening in many countries now and while the right are eminently capable of the same one difference seems to be that much of the modern media seems to be aligned also. In the past the TV media took a much more neutral approach. The more aligned it becomes the more one or other group becomes alienated and voiceless. The modern 'cancel cutlure' is an especially heinous example of this.
“Talk of ‘beating Covid’ was always nonsense After immersing myself in the science, it’s clear to me that phrases like ‘all-out war’ only scared the nation out of its wits
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
Ordinarily I'd agree, but for someone so adept at finding facts that suit his argument -- and it's no small skill -- he is hopeless at responding to contrary evidence even when it's from the same source he's looking at. As such, battling his facts with facts become performative, for the benefit of others. I'm not saying there's no value in that, but at some point you really do have to step out of that game and say to him, dude, what are you even doing?
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
Has he done something or gone somewhere, then?
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
I really don't think so, at all. There's the potential for violence from a few individuals, but I see no prospect of anything on a mass organised scale.
@edmundintokyo did make this point before the election, but what's striking about Trump's coup attempt is how inept and lacking in bottle it is.
When Trump first tweeted "stop the count" after election day he was still ahead in the count in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If his supporters, like those who had postured in the Michigan Capitol in a lockdown protest, had turned up in numbers, armed and determined, they could have stopped those counts. They could have destroyed ballots and made a count impossible.
It didn't happen.
Likewise, the much touted Republican observers who I was worried would intimidate Democrats and prevent them from voting on the day? Didn't happen.
I never thought that Trump himself was attempting to organise these things, but I thought he was creating an atmosphere in which a capable Thomas Cromwell like figure could organise them, or a hothead like William de Tracy would be inspired to act.
I'm sure Trump would have been delighted if someone had demonstrated the competence and determination to orchestrate a coup on his behalf, but that person doesn't yet exist.
They didn't stop the votes from being cast, or counted, so constitutionally that's them done, and the Army lost. Republican Governors have talked with Biden - they're not about to foment rebellion.
Trump is done. But what his shenanigans are doing is keeping the attention of his supporters onto him. It's preventing the Republican party as a whole from moving on.
Hes pretty shameless but a coward. Hed encourage the extremists and defend them afterwards but hed not want to seem to directly call for violence for example.
I think David's analysis is fair - Trump is an unscrupulous egotist with nmo respect for democracy who above all wants to win and be admired for it, but he doesn't have a history of violence or any real interest in organising an insurrection. And that's a positive thing among all the negatives - he could have thrown the country in something like civil war, but he didn't, not because he was cowardly but because there is actually a point beyond which he won't go.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
Yes. A massive issue. As the excellent header points out, due to the EC system the result was much closer than 306 - 232 implies. If the Dems had chosen any candidate other than Biden I think they would have lost.
Behind the scenes, of course, other lawyers and Inland Revenue people are gathering. And, of course Deutsche Bank need their money back. Unless he's President the whole ramshackle commercial enterprise which is the Trump Organisation could easily collapse.
Trump's not going to be hurting for cash. How much would Amazon or Netflix give him for a reality show?
Not sure he and Bezos are on good terms.
Probably because Bezos really is mega rich.
That and owning the (insert fake news rant here) Washington Post.
I have been astonished at the rate at which our energy has switched to wind and solar. It is a massive change in a surprisingly short period.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
Ordinarily I'd agree, but for someone so adept at finding facts that suit his argument -- and it's no small skill -- he is hopeless at responding to contrary evidence even when it's from the same source he's looking at. As such, battling his facts with facts become performative, for the benefit of others. I'm not saying there's no value in that, but at some point you really do have to step out of that game and say to him, dude, what are you even doing?
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
On an intentions level, is there much difference between "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" and "defund the police"?
One is a vastly superior slogan, but the basic idea is the same. Republicans couldn't have created a better slogan for their opponents.
On Monday both Michigan and Pennsylvania canvas boards meet to certify the results . Expect some last minute legal attempts to stop that . Both those states have Dem SOS’s so if any legal challenges aren’t successful they’re likely to rapidly certify the results.
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
Yes. A massive issue. As the excellent header points out, due to the EC system the result was much closer than 306 - 232 implies. If the Dems had chosen any candidate other than Biden I think they would have lost.
Yes, for all its faults the Dem Primaries did their job. They picked the winner.
When I was 20 I spent a month and a half travelling the US by train. 30+ states visited. East. Middle. West. North. South. America struck me as being like a zoo, where the exhibits in one place were very different to other places. I was struck by just how little travelled some people we met were - surfer dudes who had never left southern California, a bookish teacher who couldn't understand why we had coins that were worth an odd number of cents, a southern gentleman who over breakfast on the train asked if we get etiquette lessons in England as we "eat so dainty" by using a knife AND a fork at the same time.
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
So you believe in rights but not inalienable rights?
*I* believe in inalienable rights. But I am also a (born-again I suppose) liberal. WWho am I to impose my values on others? I have described southern dirt poor GOP voters as "shitkickers" and I stand by that. If they don't want what the rest of us consider to be their rights and vote them away is it up to us to stop them and say they can't?
I have been astonished at the rate at which our energy has switched to wind and solar. It is a massive change in a surprisingly short period.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
Interesting that in both cases its a big push from government/events that's helped. (Or so it seems to me). The moon landings are an obvious similar example - clearly the political imperative launched some pretty exciting and rapid developments. I'm a bit of a space fan so I'd love to see a similar push again, but there are all sorts of areas where a big push might be used - obviously electric vehicles is the next in line and mostly underway too.
Perhaps though the rich of this world may become rich enough to actually self-start these pushes themselves - already signs of that with the likes of SpaceX and Hyperloop.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
That may well be the plan. I think it may not work out well for him though; There's plenty to prosecute him for, and for all that Biden has said he won't interfere with the decision, people at that level have to be attuned to his general direction. Biden is projecting outward calm but he must be hopping mad, and if Trump refuses to go away then there's no way to drop it and move forward. So why not give someone the nod to find a nice, simple, self-serving crime and lock him up?
I have been astonished at the rate at which our energy has switched to wind and solar. It is a massive change in a surprisingly short period.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
We just needed to get past having pumping water up a Welsh mountain as the only way to store electricity for when it was dark and not windy?
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
On an intentions level, is there much difference between "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" and "defund the police"?
One is a vastly superior slogan, but the basic idea is the same. Republicans couldn't have created a better slogan for their opponents.
Trivia: "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" was coined by Tony Gordon Brown for Tony Blair, back when they were on the same side.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
I see we are back on the popular PB pastime of conducting a post-mortem on the winning candidate. Strange behaviour, really.
Not really. The winner will be around next time (or the Democrats, if Biden doesn’t run again). The loser won’t be. So the question of why the winner won more narrowly than expected has significant betting implications for the future.
“Talk of ‘beating Covid’ was always nonsense After immersing myself in the science, it’s clear to me that phrases like ‘all-out war’ only scared the nation out of its wits
Seems like an odd headline in the month we've finally got a series of virus-busting weapons added to humanity's arsenal. Is the article similarly weird, or does it make better sense than the banner?
He's saying he's listened to a bunch of scientists and they've modified his gut feeling that they'd msiled politicians into over-reaction; he accepts that masks are helpful, but still feels that policy veers too much to over-caution and thinks the scientists are not as militant as one might think.
Matthew has an instinctive bias to split the difference on any subject, which is often but not alwats a good idea. I thought this article started interestingly but petered out inconclusively.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
I really don't think so, at all. There's the potential for violence from a few individuals, but I see no prospect of anything on a mass organised scale.
@edmundintokyo did make this point before the election, but what's striking about Trump's coup attempt is how inept and lacking in bottle it is.
When Trump first tweeted "stop the count" after election day he was still ahead in the count in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If his supporters, like those who had postured in the Michigan Capitol in a lockdown protest, had turned up in numbers, armed and determined, they could have stopped those counts. They could have destroyed ballots and made a count impossible.
It didn't happen.
Likewise, the much touted Republican observers who I was worried would intimidate Democrats and prevent them from voting on the day? Didn't happen.
I never thought that Trump himself was attempting to organise these things, but I thought he was creating an atmosphere in which a capable Thomas Cromwell like figure could organise them, or a hothead like William de Tracy would be inspired to act.
I'm sure Trump would have been delighted if someone had demonstrated the competence and determination to orchestrate a coup on his behalf, but that person doesn't yet exist.
They didn't stop the votes from being cast, or counted, so constitutionally that's them done, and the Army lost. Republican Governors have talked with Biden - they're not about to foment rebellion.
Trump is done. But what his shenanigans are doing is keeping the attention of his supporters onto him. It's preventing the Republican party as a whole from moving on.
Hes pretty shameless but a coward. Hed encourage the extremists and defend them afterwards but hed not want to seem to directly call for violence for example.
I think David's analysis is fair - Trump is an unscrupulous egotist with nmo respect for democracy who above all wants to win and be admired for it, but he doesn't have a history of violence or any real interest in organising an insurrection. And that's a positive thing among all the negatives - he could have thrown the country in something like civil war, but he didn't, not because he was cowardly but because there is actually a point beyond which he won't go.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
One of the more enjoyable aspects of this site is how good we are at projecting plans onto people who probably don't have any? I remember doing it myself with Mrs May and Brexit, and look how that turned out.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
That may well be the plan. I think it may not work out well for him though; There's plenty to prosecute him for, and for all that Biden has said he won't interfere with the decision, people at that level have to be attuned to his general direction. Biden is projecting outward calm but he must be hopping mad, and if Trump refuses to go away then there's no way to drop it and move forward. So why not give someone the nod to find a nice, simple, self-serving crime and lock him up?
Biden doesn't need to get involved in that stuff, nor should he. There are indictments out there ready for Trump, and whilst I am not certain that a conviction will follow (because, well, juries), I am certain that there's enough coming down the pike to tie Trump up in a legal morass for the rest of his life.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
I think “Defund the Police” may have been a big vote winner for Trump. There are a lot of non-crazy republicans and I expect more than a few independents who thought that was a dangerous idea. I know that it doesn’t actually mean abolish the police, and that it was not something that Biden supported, but it was still a gift to those opposed to the Democrats. Beating someone as bad as Trump should have been easy, but the Democrats nearly failed anyway: this should have been an election with a similar margin to the one Reagan got in 1984. They need to work out why it wasn’t.
Yes. A massive issue. As the excellent header points out, due to the EC system the result was much closer than 306 - 232 implies. If the Dems had chosen any candidate other than Biden I think they would have lost.
Yes, for all its faults the Dem Primaries did their job. They picked the winner.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
John Gray has a long piece in last week's New Statesman looking at the situation in America. The arrogance of liberals and progressives is a key issue he argues. Trump is a symptom rather than a cause.
Compared with the humility of John Gray. He has half a point, but sheesh.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
I really don't think so, at all. There's the potential for violence from a few individuals, but I see no prospect of anything on a mass organised scale.
@edmundintokyo did make this point before the election, but what's striking about Trump's coup attempt is how inept and lacking in bottle it is.
When Trump first tweeted "stop the count" after election day he was still ahead in the count in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If his supporters, like those who had postured in the Michigan Capitol in a lockdown protest, had turned up in numbers, armed and determined, they could have stopped those counts. They could have destroyed ballots and made a count impossible.
It didn't happen.
Likewise, the much touted Republican observers who I was worried would intimidate Democrats and prevent them from voting on the day? Didn't happen.
I never thought that Trump himself was attempting to organise these things, but I thought he was creating an atmosphere in which a capable Thomas Cromwell like figure could organise them, or a hothead like William de Tracy would be inspired to act.
I'm sure Trump would have been delighted if someone had demonstrated the competence and determination to orchestrate a coup on his behalf, but that person doesn't yet exist.
They didn't stop the votes from being cast, or counted, so constitutionally that's them done, and the Army lost. Republican Governors have talked with Biden - they're not about to foment rebellion.
Trump is done. But what his shenanigans are doing is keeping the attention of his supporters onto him. It's preventing the Republican party as a whole from moving on.
Hes pretty shameless but a coward. Hed encourage the extremists and defend them afterwards but hed not want to seem to directly call for violence for example.
I think David's analysis is fair - Trump is an unscrupulous egotist with nmo respect for democracy who above all wants to win and be admired for it, but he doesn't have a history of violence or any real interest in organising an insurrection. And that's a positive thing among all the negatives - he could have thrown the country in something like civil war, but he didn't, not because he was cowardly but because there is actually a point beyond which he won't go.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
I think you're being far too generous to Trump. More likely that any decision to pull back from instigating an armed insurrection will be no more than a pragmatic one based on a calculation that he can't as yet get away with it, and the risks to him personally would be too great if it failed. There is otherwise absolutely nothing in the man's moral compass that would suggest that such a step would be beyond him if he felt it served his interests. He has absolutely no respect for democracy and is quite prepared to subvert it to hang on. He has played up to the violent elements in his base and has encouraged them. He has been prepared already to cause at least tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths not because he thinks the risks of the virus is overblown but in the belief that dismissing the virus would help him electorally. The man will clearly stop at nothing, given the chance.
I have been astonished at the rate at which our energy has switched to wind and solar. It is a massive change in a surprisingly short period.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
Interesting that in both cases its a big push from government/events that's helped. (Or so it seems to me). The moon landings are an obvious similar example - clearly the political imperative launched some pretty exciting and rapid developments. I'm a bit of a space fan so I'd love to see a similar push again, but there are all sorts of areas where a big push might be used - obviously electric vehicles is the next in line and mostly underway too.
Perhaps though the rich of this world may become rich enough to actually self-start these pushes themselves - already signs of that with the likes of SpaceX and Hyperloop.
Government is the manifestation of the will of our society. We choose governments who are willing to tax and pay for certain things and not tax and pay for others. It is inevitable that with major changes like this governments will play a decisive role. This is what we have elections for.
Problems can arise where there is an establishment consensus that is not shared by a significant number of people. The war in Iraq, the poll tax and inevitably the B word come to mind, but usually our system gets there eventually.
The work done on the vaccines has been truly incredible. I suspect we have learned more about epidemiology in modern society in the last year than we knew before as well.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
Has he done something or gone somewhere, then?
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
For me, only two things matter about today:
1) HYUFD starts posting again 2) Betfair settles Georgia
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
That may well be the plan. I think it may not work out well for him though; There's plenty to prosecute him for, and for all that Biden has said he won't interfere with the decision, people at that level have to be attuned to his general direction. Biden is projecting outward calm but he must be hopping mad, and if Trump refuses to go away then there's no way to drop it and move forward. So why not give someone the nod to find a nice, simple, self-serving crime and lock him up?
I think Trump will refuse to go away. Trumpism is a personality cult. He loves the stage and his fans love him. I can see him continuing to perform to large but dwindling audiences who all scream to his catchphrases "Lock her up" "Build the Wall". He has lost the props of the Presidency, will probably lose his Twitter account, will rapidly age and become an irrelevance by 2024. Sad. Or he will end up in jail. Sadder.
Great article, David, with one quibble: Biden’s wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia were paper-thin... Paper thin would be something like Florida 2000. The above three were substantial enough wins to survive shenanigans.
I think we possibly underestimate just how much, despite Trump’s malign influence, the overwhelming majority of those involved in the democratic process are still committed to it, and that even most of the Trump partisans in those positions will not go beyond what is plausibly deniable.
Excellent header from DH, it really is, but with an unaccountable omission. There is no consideration of the most important issue of all arising from this assault on democracy by the wannabe fascist Donald Trump. No answer to the question being asked 24/7 around the world and by almost everyone I bump into - WTF will Betfair settle the market?
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
I really don't think so, at all. There's the potential for violence from a few individuals, but I see no prospect of anything on a mass organised scale.
@edmundintokyo did make this point before the election, but what's striking about Trump's coup attempt is how inept and lacking in bottle it is.
When Trump first tweeted "stop the count" after election day he was still ahead in the count in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If his supporters, like those who had postured in the Michigan Capitol in a lockdown protest, had turned up in numbers, armed and determined, they could have stopped those counts. They could have destroyed ballots and made a count impossible.
It didn't happen.
Likewise, the much touted Republican observers who I was worried would intimidate Democrats and prevent them from voting on the day? Didn't happen.
I never thought that Trump himself was attempting to organise these things, but I thought he was creating an atmosphere in which a capable Thomas Cromwell like figure could organise them, or a hothead like William de Tracy would be inspired to act.
I'm sure Trump would have been delighted if someone had demonstrated the competence and determination to orchestrate a coup on his behalf, but that person doesn't yet exist.
They didn't stop the votes from being cast, or counted, so constitutionally that's them done, and the Army lost. Republican Governors have talked with Biden - they're not about to foment rebellion.
Trump is done. But what his shenanigans are doing is keeping the attention of his supporters onto him. It's preventing the Republican party as a whole from moving on.
Hes pretty shameless but a coward. Hed encourage the extremists and defend them afterwards but hed not want to seem to directly call for violence for example.
I think David's analysis is fair - Trump is an unscrupulous egotist with nmo respect for democracy who above all wants to win and be admired for it, but he doesn't have a history of violence or any real interest in organising an insurrection. And that's a positive thing among all the negatives - he could have thrown the country in something like civil war, but he didn't, not because he was cowardly but because there is actually a point beyond which he won't go.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
I think you're being far too generous to Trump. More likely that any decision to pull back from instigating an armed insurrection will be no more than a pragmatic one based on a calculation that he can't as yet get away with it, and the risks to him personally would be too great if it failed. There is otherwise absolutely nothing in the man's moral compass that would suggest that such a step would be beyond him if he felt it served his interests. He has absolutely no respect for democracy and is quite prepared to subvert it to hang on. He has played up to the violent elements in his base and has encouraged them. He has been prepared already to cause at least tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths not because he thinks the risks of the virus is overblown but in the belief that dismissing the virus would help him electorally. The man will clearly stop at nothing, given the chance.
I was just idly speculating on the similarities between Trump and Jefferson Davis, so I looked up the latter’s Wikipedia entry for some basic information. I find it contains this absolutely priceless passage:
Davis's doctor Stanford E. Chaille pronounced him too ill to travel to Beauvoir; four medical students who were sons of Confederate veterans and a Catholic nun attended Davis in the Charity Hospital ambulance which took him to the Fenner home.
I see we are back on the popular PB pastime of conducting a post-mortem on the winning candidate. Strange behaviour, really.
Not really. The winner will be around next time (or the Democrats, if Biden doesn’t run again). The loser won’t be. So the question of why the winner won more narrowly than expected has significant betting implications for the future.
Well, analysing the election certainly is worthwhile, but I was mainly referring to the sense that people were discussing what went wrong for the Biden campaign. And when you think that Biden was up against a man who is extremely skilled in hogging attention, was the incumbent, was campaigning in a weird environment where political rallies were not just a partisan affair but a public health one, whose base turned out in huge numbers, and whose party is good at extracting the most value out of the electoral system... the fact that Biden still won 306 EC votes, an outright majority of votes, and a lead of some six million votes, is really quite something.
I was struck by the comment about "reconnecting with the base". That seemed excessively strange to me, given this has been the highest turnout election since universal suffrage. For me, the question of "what went wrong for Biden?" is just weird.
I must admit, I'm more than a little scared that the US descends into civil war.
I really don't think so, at all. There's the potential for violence from a few individuals, but I see no prospect of anything on a mass organised scale.
@edmundintokyo did make this point before the election, but what's striking about Trump's coup attempt is how inept and lacking in bottle it is.
When Trump first tweeted "stop the count" after election day he was still ahead in the count in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia. If his supporters, like those who had postured in the Michigan Capitol in a lockdown protest, had turned up in numbers, armed and determined, they could have stopped those counts. They could have destroyed ballots and made a count impossible.
It didn't happen.
Likewise, the much touted Republican observers who I was worried would intimidate Democrats and prevent them from voting on the day? Didn't happen.
I never thought that Trump himself was attempting to organise these things, but I thought he was creating an atmosphere in which a capable Thomas Cromwell like figure could organise them, or a hothead like William de Tracy would be inspired to act.
I'm sure Trump would have been delighted if someone had demonstrated the competence and determination to orchestrate a coup on his behalf, but that person doesn't yet exist.
They didn't stop the votes from being cast, or counted, so constitutionally that's them done, and the Army lost. Republican Governors have talked with Biden - they're not about to foment rebellion.
Trump is done. But what his shenanigans are doing is keeping the attention of his supporters onto him. It's preventing the Republican party as a whole from moving on.
Hes pretty shameless but a coward. Hed encourage the extremists and defend them afterwards but hed not want to seem to directly call for violence for example.
I think David's analysis is fair - Trump is an unscrupulous egotist with nmo respect for democracy who above all wants to win and be admired for it, but he doesn't have a history of violence or any real interest in organising an insurrection. And that's a positive thing among all the negatives - he could have thrown the country in something like civil war, but he didn't, not because he was cowardly but because there is actually a point beyond which he won't go.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
I think you're being far too generous to Trump. More likely that any decision to pull back from instigating an armed insurrection will be no more than a pragmatic one based on a calculation that he can't as yet get away with it, and the risks to him personally would be too great if it failed. There is otherwise absolutely nothing in the man's moral compass that would suggest that such a step would be beyond him if he felt it served his interests. He has absolutely no respect for democracy and is quite prepared to subvert it to hang on. He has played up to the violent elements in his base and has encouraged them. He has been prepared already to cause at least tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths not because he thinks the risks of the virus is overblown but in the belief that dismissing the virus would help him electorally. The man will clearly stop at nothing, given the chance.
The other angle to this is: There probably will be pro-Trump terrorism, right? And pretty soon?
We've had a couple of plots already, stopped by US law enforcement, who have either been working hard to infiltrate these cells or already happened to have people in the relevant far-right Facebook groups in a personal capacity. But some time between now and the Senate runoff someone who didn't discuss their plans for armed insurrection in a public channel is going to go and shoot up an election office or a legislature, aren't they? This seems like the kind of thing that will affect the news cycle.
I think the government should turn Facebook off when the vaccination programmes start. Already I've had my mum spout fake news about it she saw on Facebook.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
Has he done something or gone somewhere, then?
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
For me, only two things matter about today:
1) HYUFD starts posting again 2) Betfair settles Georgia
I see he suddenly stopped posting on the day that Cummo was sacked, having been very busy on here right up until then. Are we missing something?
I see we are back on the popular PB pastime of conducting a post-mortem on the winning candidate. Strange behaviour, really.
Not really. The winner will be around next time (or the Democrats, if Biden doesn’t run again). The loser won’t be. So the question of why the winner won more narrowly than expected has significant betting implications for the future.
Well, analysing the election certainly is worthwhile, but I was mainly referring to the sense that people were discussing what went wrong for the Biden campaign. And when you think that Biden was up against a man who is extremely skilled in hogging attention, was the incumbent, was campaigning in a weird environment where political rallies were not just a partisan affair but a public health one, whose base turned out in huge numbers, and whose party is good at extracting the most value out of the electoral system... the fact that Biden still won 306 EC votes, an outright majority of votes, and a lead of some six million votes, is really quite something.
I was struck by the comment about "reconnecting with the base". That seemed excessively strange to me, given this has been the highest turnout election since universal suffrage. For me, the question of "what went wrong for Biden?" is just weird.
Yes - the absolutely key electoral fact we aren't weighting heavily enough is that US voters almost always give their Presidents a second go.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
I find @HYUFD to be completely honest. He will stubbornly stand by his argument no matter how irrational it may get, but many are guilty of that. Conversely he will be flexible as the Conservative party amends its position, but he is consistent in that as well even if others like me find it bizarre. Again he is not alone in doing this and is doing it honestly even though it appears contradictory.
where do you buy those rose tinted specs, I want a pair.
I got them for Christmas Malcolm. They are brilliant aren't they?
I think to think the best of everyone (Trump excepted).
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
Great article, David, with one quibble: Biden’s wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia were paper-thin... Paper thin would be something like Florida 2000. The above three were substantial enough wins to survive shenanigans.
I think we possibly underestimate just how much, despite Trump’s malign influence, the overwhelming majority of those involved in the democratic process are still committed to it, and that even most of the Trump partisans in those positions will not go beyond what is plausibly deniable.
People can get away with the "paper thin" because of the peculiarity of FPTnP that small numbers of swing voters effectively decide the election.
So we see statements like "only X thousand votes could have swung the election the other way" - yet rarely any broader analysis of how much the national popular vote would need to swing (under UNS or any other model) to have delivered such a turnabout.
I have been astonished at the rate at which our energy has switched to wind and solar. It is a massive change in a surprisingly short period.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
We just needed to get past having pumping water up a Welsh mountain as the only way to store electricity for when it was dark and not windy?
We have many ways of storing electricity, the problem is in making it economic to store it for a couple of weeks at a time.
The mountain pumps go through a daily cycle of buying electricity at night and selling by day, so they make money every day to cover operating expenses and capital costs. The same model would work well most days for time-shifting solar energy from the middle of the day to the evening, for six months of the year, or tidal all year round.
If you look at the patterns of wind energy, which are a result of patterns in the weather, they are on larger timescales of ~week.
So, over the last month we had a couple of weeks with wind energy up at 10GW level most of the time, then it dropped below 5GW for most of a week, and now it's been up around 10GW for most of the last week or so.
This means, to make timeshifting work, you need to store more electricity, for longer, and with a higher margin between buying and selling prices. That's hard.
Instead of timeshifting I think you aim for a huge surplus. If you increase wind by a factor of ten from now then you can cover your immediate electricity needs even when wind supply is low (along with some tidal and interconnectors). On windy days you them have a huge amount of electricity to use to create hydrogen, which you can then use as a feedstock for synthetic fuels if not directly.
Having enough storage for the synthetic methane, etc, so that you can switch off its generation for a week when the wind is low is much easier.
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
Has he done something or gone somewhere, then?
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
For me, only two things matter about today:
1) HYUFD starts posting again 2) Betfair settles Georgia
I see he suddenly stopped posting on the day that Cummo was sacked, having been very busy on here right up until then. Are we missing something?
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
Has he done something or gone somewhere, then?
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
For me, only two things matter about today:
1) HYUFD starts posting again 2) Betfair settles Georgia
I see he suddenly stopped posting on the day that Cummo was sacked, having been very busy on here right up until then. Are we missing something?
Re HYUFD, as I posted the other day, I hope he's OK. Covid cases are rising in Essex.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
I find @HYUFD to be completely honest. He will stubbornly stand by his argument no matter how irrational it may get, but many are guilty of that. Conversely he will be flexible as the Conservative party amends its position, but he is consistent in that as well even if others like me find it bizarre. Again he is not alone in doing this and is doing it honestly even though it appears contradictory.
where do you buy those rose tinted specs, I want a pair.
What is truly astonishing, from a UK perspective, is that Trump has received 73.8m votes, far more than any candidate in history other than Joe Biden. Trump has very few supporters on this board, @MrEd is the only one that instantly comes to mind although @HYUFD dabbled, mainly, in fairness, pointing out that his chances were better than we thought. It shows the incredible gulf between American politics and mindset and ours.
Millions of Americans clearly believe that Biden is some sort of a socialist. Other than being thick I really struggle to see any evidence for that at all in a very long career. Their definition of socialism would clearly include most of the current Tory party.
I think that it is very difficult for us to predict what these millions might do. We simply do not understand their terms of reference.
Re: HYUFD It's impossible to truly know someone's mind, but the tenor of his posts made me think he would have voted Trump. Of course, he repeatedly claimed that he would vote for Biden if he had a vote, but, in short, I didn't believe him.
HYUFD is just a super-loyal Tory who goes wherever that journey takes him. He was a passionate Cameroon Remainer who became an equally passionate Johnson Leaver. He realized a Biden win would leave his new beau up shit creek so he became an obsessive Trumpster.
Think Stretford Ender
HYUFD`s recall of political factoids from history is extraordinary. I`ve been shot down before for saying that he largely just posts facts and some posters should lay off the rudeness towards him. He`s cherry-picking - of course - but still facts. Its`s up to us to raise our games to challenge him with equal precision.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
Has he done something or gone somewhere, then?
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
For me, only two things matter about today:
1) HYUFD starts posting again 2) Betfair settles Georgia
I see he suddenly stopped posting on the day that Cummo was sacked, having been very busy on here right up until then. Are we missing something?
Re HYUFD, as I posted the other day, I hope he's OK. Covid cases are rising in Essex.
A well earned rest. Proving the efficacy of Trafalgar takes its toll
The governor has taken repeated legal action to prevent any local lockdown. And this with the imminent prospect of a vaccine.
El Paso businesses reopen after court blocks shutdown order https://www.cbsnews.com/news/el-paso-businesses-reopen-after-court-blocks-shutdown-order-2020-11-14/ El Paso business began reopening Friday, less than 24 hours after a court of appeals quashed the county judge's shutdown order as the city deals with one of the worst COVID-19 outbreaks in the country. On Saturday, the city of El Paso said reported 1,512 new COVID-19 cases and 15 additional deaths.
The three-judge 8th Court of Appeals in El Paso issued rulings on Thursday and Friday that County Judge Ricardo Samaniego could not supersede Texas Governor Greg Abbott's October 7 order on reopening. On October 29, Samaniego had issued a monthlong shutdown order for nonessential businesses, but he was challenged by a group of restaurant owners and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton...
Re the Priti episode and not wanting to get into all the arguments of yesterday but one action that stood out for me and which I think I will remember for sometime regarding Boris:
Boris asked the author of the report to water it down. I want to know from a Boris supporter eg @Philip_Thompson how that is ever justifiable.
And to help those supporting Boris in this action, try thinking of the consequences of the reverse. Would anyone consider it at all moral if he had asked the independent author to beef it up, with the consequences that an innocent person actually looked guilty?
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
That's the Home Office civil servants ?
The same Home Office which hasn't been 'fit for purpose' for over a decade ?
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
It doesn't sound like it. It sounds much more like humiliating the 'little' people. I've seen it too often. It's peculiarly unattractive and I have to say in my profession its most often done by powerful women usually producers.
I see we are back on the popular PB pastime of conducting a post-mortem on the winning candidate. Strange behaviour, really.
Not really. The winner will be around next time (or the Democrats, if Biden doesn’t run again). The loser won’t be. So the question of why the winner won more narrowly than expected has significant betting implications for the future.
Well, analysing the election certainly is worthwhile, but I was mainly referring to the sense that people were discussing what went wrong for the Biden campaign. And when you think that Biden was up against a man who is extremely skilled in hogging attention, was the incumbent, was campaigning in a weird environment where political rallies were not just a partisan affair but a public health one, whose base turned out in huge numbers, and whose party is good at extracting the most value out of the electoral system... the fact that Biden still won 306 EC votes, an outright majority of votes, and a lead of some six million votes, is really quite something.
I was struck by the comment about "reconnecting with the base". That seemed excessively strange to me, given this has been the highest turnout election since universal suffrage. For me, the question of "what went wrong for Biden?" is just weird.
Yes. Cue the old George Best joke.
This was a great achievement by Biden. Far as I'm concerned he had one job to do (remove this piece of vermin from office by beating him in the election) and he did it. It was the most important "win" in any political contest in my lifetime simply because the consequences of failure were so unspeakably dire. And Joe stepped up at the age of 78 and delivered. Delivered the win. Delivered us from evil. There'll be time enough to talk about whether he should have won bigger. How he's either a front for the left or he's sold out to centrism and corporate interests. I look forward to that. But right now I love him and it will last for some time. I feel such gratitude and affection for the guy.
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
That's the Home Office civil servants ?
The same Home Office which hasn't been 'fit for purpose' for over a decade ?
Being masters at thwarting their minister isn't incompatible with being unfit for purpose.
But Roger offers a credible alternative (or supplementary) hypothesis, too.
I have been astonished at the rate at which our energy has switched to wind and solar. It is a massive change in a surprisingly short period.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
I have no doubt that we as are species are scientifically capable of meeting most of the challenges that nature can throw at us, including creating a carbon-neutral economy in order to combat climate change. Where I have major doubts, though, is in the political will needed to push through the required policies.
While the increase in renewable energy consumption of the last decade or so has been impressive, it remains a fraction of what is required to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions. If we, and the rest of the world, are unable to speed things up, we will be leaving a legacy of major problems for our descendants.
Re the Priti episode and not wanting to get into all the arguments of yesterday but one action that stood out for me and which I think I will remember for sometime regarding Boris:
Boris asked the author of the report to water it down. I want to know from a Boris supporter eg @Philip_Thompson how that is ever justifiable.
And to help those supporting Boris in this action, try thinking of the consequences of the reverse. Would anyone consider it at all moral if he had asked the independent author to beef it up, with the consequences that an innocent person actually looked guilty?
I believe the response from No 10 is that Sir Alex Allan's conclusions were "entirely his own", a statement notable for an absolute absence of any denial that pressure was exerted.
When I was 20 I spent a month and a half travelling the US by train. 30+ states visited. East. Middle. West. North. South. America struck me as being like a zoo, where the exhibits in one place were very different to other places. I was struck by just how little travelled some people we met were - surfer dudes who had never left southern California, a bookish teacher who couldn't understand why we had coins that were worth an odd number of cents, a southern gentleman who over breakfast on the train asked if we get etiquette lessons in England as we "eat so dainty" by using a knife AND a fork at the same time.
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
When I was 20 I spent a month and a half travelling the US by train. 30+ states visited. East. Middle. West. North. South. America struck me as being like a zoo, where the exhibits in one place were very different to other places. I was struck by just how little travelled some people we met were - surfer dudes who had never left southern California, a bookish teacher who couldn't understand why we had coins that were worth an odd number of cents, a southern gentleman who over breakfast on the train asked if we get etiquette lessons in England as we "eat so dainty" by using a knife AND a fork at the same time.
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
Does that include the right to vote ?
Gilead seems very keen on restricting the right to vote. They'll be a backwards pariah of course...
Great article, David, with one quibble: Biden’s wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia were paper-thin... Paper thin would be something like Florida 2000. The above three were substantial enough wins to survive shenanigans.
I think we possibly underestimate just how much, despite Trump’s malign influence, the overwhelming majority of those involved in the democratic process are still committed to it, and that even most of the Trump partisans in those positions will not go beyond what is plausibly deniable.
The winning margin in Pennsylvania is over 80k. That's some thickness of paper, more like a redwood tree.
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
That's the Home Office civil servants ?
The same Home Office which hasn't been 'fit for purpose' for over a decade ?
Not just the Home Office of course. The bullying complaints have followed Patel from DfiD and the DWP.
Earlier this year the DWP made a payout to a woman who attempted suicide after allegedly being bullied by Patel when she was Employment Minister.
By seeking to water down the report - to the point where the government‘s ethics advisor has resigned - Boris demonstrates that it is effectively carte blanche now on bullying behaviour. Like a cancer, this will spread across the government.
Alanis Morissette would love the fact this has all come out on Anti-Bullying Week.
Great article, David, with one quibble: Biden’s wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia were paper-thin... Paper thin would be something like Florida 2000. The above three were substantial enough wins to survive shenanigans.
I think we possibly underestimate just how much, despite Trump’s malign influence, the overwhelming majority of those involved in the democratic process are still committed to it, and that even most of the Trump partisans in those positions will not go beyond what is plausibly deniable.
Absolutely. I'm afraid too many people have taken from Trump's tantrum that the election was ridiculously close.
It wasn't a landslide, and it was closer than a lot of people thought it would be a few days out. But it doesn't deserve the word "close" and, were it not for the fact it took a little longer than usual to get to results due to exceptional levels of postal voting, Trump and Giuliani's amateur dramatics, and the Senators humouring it, we'd not be talking about a "close" election.
The % vote margin was on a par with Obama/Romney (and absolute vote margin rather higher), the states Trump is whining about had five or even six figure majorities, and the electoral college margin was enough to sustain at least a couple of big states going the other way. It was pretty comfortable in reality.
Republicans would do well not to fall into the trap of believing their hype and thinking they lost in a squeaker. That underestimates the challenge for the future.
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
That's the Home Office civil servants ?
The same Home Office which hasn't been 'fit for purpose' for over a decade ?
Two things can be true at the same time: - the Home Office is not fit for purpose - Priti Patel has neither the intellect nor the management skills to bring about improvement
These 'Patsies for Priti' are becoming tiresome. Its so obviously a PR offensive. They're all female and the line is that sometimes (as a woman) you have to be tough. They're all saying being tough isn't bullying.
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
Ah, the Alistair Campbell defence: ‘I’m robust but I’m not a bully.’
To be honest she was probably trying to compensate for having to manage civil servants who are both a lot more clever than she is and with a lifetime experience of honing their inner Sir Humphreys. Which doesn't excuse anything, of course.
That's the Home Office civil servants ?
The same Home Office which hasn't been 'fit for purpose' for over a decade ?
Being masters at thwarting their minister isn't incompatible with being unfit for purpose.
But Roger offers a credible alternative (or supplementary) hypothesis, too.
The unpleasant female boss does exist.
But posh male misogynists always seem to know lots of them - I wonder why.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of Priti Patel are I suspect that most people would become exasperated with trying to control the Home Office.
I also suspect that if they didn't have their nice safe jobs the Home Office Sir Humphreys might find that ability at thwarting their bosses and their inability at being fit for purpose would rapidly see them lose their jobs in most other places.
Comments
u dO kNOw WhAt tHe S iN nSDaP stANdS fOr?
We know from our own politics that pretty much anyone who has been in office for any length of time picks up stuff that can be thrown at them thereafter.
This probably means that Biden isn't going to change the world. But it also indicates that he's a decent guy - excerpts from the historic never-broadcast interview with David Frost are being repeated on R4 and are well worth a listen.
Think Stretford Ender
And then the explanation from a guy about why America works - the American dream. It doesn't matter how backwards and injust America is even compared to Canada, their system tells them that they are superior when they aren't and that they are rich when they live in poverty and that the American system means that work can lift them to being self-made when most of them never will.
He predicted that at the point where most realise just how absurd this lie is the civil war would start - because the people who have been screwed hardest by the system have most of the guns. Yet in reality I think we're seeing the opposite. The GOP have worked very hard to cement the lie and have persuaded the oppressed that their "riches" and very way of life is being threatened by these other Americans. Simultaneously the people who have had the scales washed from their eyes or saw right through it can't believe the venal stupidity of the other side.
Perhaps a loosening of ties is better. Not that America should have a civil war or formally split, but operate on a more confederal basis. As was asked above, if some states vote for Gilead is it up to other states to tell them no? I support the woman's right to choose, but that includes their right to give up their rights
"So, Mr Hodges. Daniel. Danny. You believe this to be a serious matter. If that were the case, surely there would be a mechanism, a cadre of elite forces to drag me unwillingly from my post, much as [insert classical allusion here, I'm a physics teacher].
There is no such force, you say? But it may harm my electoral prospects? My electoral prospects are of nugatory relevance until the Year of Our Lord 2024. Until then, as I understand The Youth say, jog on. Or as our American friends would no doubt say, "Don't book him, Danno."
From Boris's perspective in challenging, even shouting at, senior officials, Patel was doing what she had been asked to do. He doesn't see much wrong with it. Hence his reluctance to accept that this amounted to bullying and a breach of the Ministerial code. That decision, along with many others, is something to be weighed by the MPs who give him his majority. If they are ok with that, that is the end of the matter.
The Ministerial code is not law. It is guidance and the report of the person appointed to investigate issues under it is an opinion, not a binding decision on the PM of the day. Boris can be criticised for his decision, the hypocrisy of his foreword is exposed, but the only views that ultimately matter are those of the 364 other MPs that form his majority. And so far they seem to be with him.
His policital radar is worthy of attention. Most of us were predicting large Biden win, some landslide even. HYUFD vacillated between narrow Biden, then narrow Trump then narrow Biden again. He drew our attentions to, for example, Arizona, Florida and Wisconsin repeatedly where Trump, he said, may defy the odds. He`s worth listening too even when you don`t agree.
He`ll be back, good as ever. He`s one of the few (maybe six or seven) posters who I regard as top tier PB.com posters. I`m minor league in comparison.
The 'American Dream' is the most successful ever piece of spin; the pinnacle of achievement from the United States of Advertising. Making everyone relaxed about gross inequality.
There's a book called "White Trash" which, despite its title, is actually an academic historical study of the underclasses in the US. From the beginning there was significant inequality, with power and land appropriated by a small number of already wealthy immigrants while vast numbers came over penniless on indentures (leaving black slavery aside, as off topic for the book - except that it did make the point that the existence of slavery meant that those on indentures or in low wage jobs could console themselves with not being bottom of the social pile). Yes, there were some who got free land and some who made themselves in the US, but social and economic mobility was always hugely less than the myths and much film and TV would suggest.
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1330083360904007682
I'll be more convinced about his sage like premonition when it predicts a left wing victory. While he continues to ramp Boris and Trump he could easily just have been lucky (partly so in the latter case). He's also ramped Farage, Le Pen, and JRM in the past, as well as the Tory sitting MP in the Brecon by-election, all failed predictions.
I think his plan D is simply to be King over the Water - the rallying figure against everything that Biden and the Democrats will do. "We were cheated, we did all we could to stop it but the coirrupty establishment prevented it, now the radical Democrats are ruining our great nation." It might pay off in 4 years, and even if it doesn't it'll be deeply satisfying for him.
It, together with the incredible scientific response to Covid in terms of vaccines, has restored my optimism that science, technology and knowledge really can address the major issues we face when it needs to and when we have the will. I did go through a period when I began to doubt this but no longer.
One is a vastly superior slogan, but the basic idea is the same. Republicans couldn't have created a better slogan for their opponents.
Perhaps though the rich of this world may become rich enough to actually self-start these pushes themselves - already signs of that with the likes of SpaceX and Hyperloop.
Matthew has an instinctive bias to split the difference on any subject, which is often but not alwats a good idea. I thought this article started interestingly but petered out inconclusively.
There are indictments out there ready for Trump, and whilst I am not certain that a conviction will follow (because, well, juries), I am certain that there's enough coming down the pike to tie Trump up in a legal morass for the rest of his life.
He has half a point, but sheesh.
Problems can arise where there is an establishment consensus that is not shared by a significant number of people. The war in Iraq, the poll tax and inevitably the B word come to mind, but usually our system gets there eventually.
The work done on the vaccines has been truly incredible. I suspect we have learned more about epidemiology in modern society in the last year than we knew before as well.
1) HYUFD starts posting again
2) Betfair settles Georgia
Biden’s wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia were paper-thin...
Paper thin would be something like Florida 2000. The above three were substantial enough wins to survive shenanigans.
I think we possibly underestimate just how much, despite Trump’s malign influence, the overwhelming majority of those involved in the democratic process are still committed to it, and that even most of the Trump partisans in those positions will not go beyond what is plausibly deniable.
Davis's doctor Stanford E. Chaille pronounced him too ill to travel to Beauvoir; four medical students who were sons of Confederate veterans and a Catholic nun attended Davis in the Charity Hospital ambulance which took him to the Fenner home.
And when you think that Biden was up against a man who is extremely skilled in hogging attention, was the incumbent, was campaigning in a weird environment where political rallies were not just a partisan affair but a public health one, whose base turned out in huge numbers, and whose party is good at extracting the most value out of the electoral system...
the fact that Biden still won 306 EC votes, an outright majority of votes, and a lead of some six million votes, is really quite something.
I was struck by the comment about "reconnecting with the base". That seemed excessively strange to me, given this has been the highest turnout election since universal suffrage. For me, the question of "what went wrong for Biden?" is just weird.
We've had a couple of plots already, stopped by US law enforcement, who have either been working hard to infiltrate these cells or already happened to have people in the relevant far-right Facebook groups in a personal capacity. But some time between now and the Senate runoff someone who didn't discuss their plans for armed insurrection in a public channel is going to go and shoot up an election office or a legislature, aren't they? This seems like the kind of thing that will affect the news cycle.
It's a shame Biden is already so old.
I think to think the best of everyone (Trump excepted).
What none of them are addressing is that she has not been accused of being tough but of bullying and they aren't the same. She only picks on juniors and the same behaviour has been exposed in three different departments.
As someone texted me this morning 'What do you expect from a hanger and flogger'.
So we see statements like "only X thousand votes could have swung the election the other way" - yet rarely any broader analysis of how much the national popular vote would need to swing (under UNS or any other model) to have delivered such a turnabout.
The mountain pumps go through a daily cycle of buying electricity at night and selling by day, so they make money every day to cover operating expenses and capital costs. The same model would work well most days for time-shifting solar energy from the middle of the day to the evening, for six months of the year, or tidal all year round.
If you look at the patterns of wind energy, which are a result of patterns in the weather, they are on larger timescales of ~week.
So, over the last month we had a couple of weeks with wind energy up at 10GW level most of the time, then it dropped below 5GW for most of a week, and now it's been up around 10GW for most of the last week or so.
This means, to make timeshifting work, you need to store more electricity, for longer, and with a higher margin between buying and selling prices. That's hard.
Instead of timeshifting I think you aim for a huge surplus. If you increase wind by a factor of ten from now then you can cover your immediate electricity needs even when wind supply is low (along with some tidal and interconnectors). On windy days you them have a huge amount of electricity to use to create hydrogen, which you can then use as a feedstock for synthetic fuels if not directly.
Having enough storage for the synthetic methane, etc, so that you can switch off its generation for a week when the wind is low is much easier.
We'd never recognise you.
And you wouldn't enjoy it. Honestly.
And this with the imminent prospect of a vaccine.
El Paso businesses reopen after court blocks shutdown order
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/el-paso-businesses-reopen-after-court-blocks-shutdown-order-2020-11-14/
El Paso business began reopening Friday, less than 24 hours after a court of appeals quashed the county judge's shutdown order as the city deals with one of the worst COVID-19 outbreaks in the country. On Saturday, the city of El Paso said reported 1,512 new COVID-19 cases and 15 additional deaths.
The three-judge 8th Court of Appeals in El Paso issued rulings on Thursday and Friday that County Judge Ricardo Samaniego could not supersede Texas Governor Greg Abbott's October 7 order on reopening. On October 29, Samaniego had issued a monthlong shutdown order for nonessential businesses, but he was challenged by a group of restaurant owners and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton...
Boris asked the author of the report to water it down. I want to know from a Boris supporter eg @Philip_Thompson how that is ever justifiable.
And to help those supporting Boris in this action, try thinking of the consequences of the reverse. Would anyone consider it at all moral if he had asked the independent author to beef it up, with the consequences that an innocent person actually looked guilty?
The same Home Office which hasn't been 'fit for purpose' for over a decade ?
This was a great achievement by Biden. Far as I'm concerned he had one job to do (remove this piece of vermin from office by beating him in the election) and he did it. It was the most important "win" in any political contest in my lifetime simply because the consequences of failure were so unspeakably dire. And Joe stepped up at the age of 78 and delivered. Delivered the win. Delivered us from evil. There'll be time enough to talk about whether he should have won bigger. How he's either a front for the left or he's sold out to centrism and corporate interests. I look forward to that. But right now I love him and it will last for some time. I feel such gratitude and affection for the guy.
But Roger offers a credible alternative (or supplementary) hypothesis, too.
While the increase in renewable energy consumption of the last decade or so has been impressive, it remains a fraction of what is required to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions. If we, and the rest of the world, are unable to speed things up, we will be leaving a legacy of major problems for our descendants.
Weasel wording arseholes.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/20/australia/south-australia-pizza-bar-lockdown-intl/index.html
The bullying complaints have followed Patel from DfiD and the DWP.
Earlier this year the DWP made a payout to a woman who attempted suicide after allegedly being bullied by Patel when she was Employment Minister.
By seeking to water down the report - to the point where the government‘s ethics advisor has resigned - Boris demonstrates that it is effectively carte blanche now on bullying behaviour. Like a cancer, this will spread across the government.
Alanis Morissette would love the fact this has all come out on Anti-Bullying Week.
This is a rotten, rotten government.
It wasn't a landslide, and it was closer than a lot of people thought it would be a few days out. But it doesn't deserve the word "close" and, were it not for the fact it took a little longer than usual to get to results due to exceptional levels of postal voting, Trump and Giuliani's amateur dramatics, and the Senators humouring it, we'd not be talking about a "close" election.
The % vote margin was on a par with Obama/Romney (and absolute vote margin rather higher), the states Trump is whining about had five or even six figure majorities, and the electoral college margin was enough to sustain at least a couple of big states going the other way. It was pretty comfortable in reality.
Republicans would do well not to fall into the trap of believing their hype and thinking they lost in a squeaker. That underestimates the challenge for the future.
- the Home Office is not fit for purpose
- Priti Patel has neither the intellect nor the management skills to bring about improvement
But posh male misogynists always seem to know lots of them - I wonder why.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of Priti Patel are I suspect that most people would become exasperated with trying to control the Home Office.
I also suspect that if they didn't have their nice safe jobs the Home Office Sir Humphreys might find that ability at thwarting their bosses and their inability at being fit for purpose would rapidly see them lose their jobs in most other places.