Categories
History isn’t going to be kind to Trump because of the manner of his departure – politicalbetting.co
History isn’t going to be kind to Trump because of the manner of his departure – politicalbetting.com
The Trump campaign spent $3 million on the Wisconsin recount.It yielded a net gain of 87 votes for Joe Biden. Recounts have failed.Lawsuits failing.Pressuring local officials and state legislators is failing.Misinformation campaign is failing. GOP leadership yet to concede.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The Macbooks are worth getting IFF:
(1) You are a road warrior, who values every extra 15 minutes away from the power plug
(2) You live in the Google / Apple Universe, and everything you want is already cross-compiled for M1
(3) You don't have old USB peripherals you need to use
My guess, FWIW, is that the Python 3.8 will not have been cross-compiled for M1, and that the binary ML libraries certainly will not have been. This will force you to use an emulated version (which will be relatively slow and will kill your battery life), in which case you should be using Intel or AMD silicon.
This will change. However: as Apple is going entirely in house with its GPU stuff, and as your ML stuff will be GPU heavy, it may never work for you to switch.
And I looked it up on-line and discovered the lead is an incredibly young Christoph Waltz.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3mUUAXg7-Y&ab_channel=TheBFSEntertainment
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-gravy-train/episode-guide/
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1333243285389914112
Biden 1.05
Democrats 1.05
Biden PV 1.02
Biden PV 49-51.9% 1.06
Trump PV 46-48.9% 1.06
Trump ECV 210-239 1.08
Biden ECV 300-329 1.08
Biden ECV Hcap -48.5 1.04
Biden ECV Hcap -63.5 1.06
Trump ECV Hcap +81.5 1.02
AZ Dem 1.05
GA Dem 1.06
MI Dem 1.06
NV Dem 1.05
PA Dem 1.06
WI Dem 1.03
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.12
Trump exit date 2021 1.11
If only he could take Darwin’s advice.
https://twitter.com/mattzieger/status/1333268294661406721
It's funny: fund management is one of the few professions in which being willing and able to change your mind is considered important.
https://twitter.com/michaelmina_lab/status/1333164953918967815
To take a random example.... those Republican senators who change their minds on the importance of defects just after they’ve lost an election.
You need find a way down the midde, to base opinions on good evidence but when the evidence shows that you need to change your mind you take that on board.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/30/environment-to-benefit-from-biggest-farming-shake-up-in-50-years
The National Farmers’ Union warned that the speed of the reduction in direct subsidies was “high risk” and some farms could become unviable, undermining domestic food production.
So many people appear to find it almost impossible to avoid socialising with others, despite clear evidence that they’re spreading a nasty virus around - maybe 2020 is the year of the introvert after all?
When you're a fund manager and you buy a company's shares, you hope they will do well. You are emotionally committed to their success.
Some news comes out: if it's negative, you'll seek to minimise its importance - it was all in the price, you'll say; or it provides an opportunity to buy more.
This is perfectly natural. But the consequence is that people become entrenched in their opinions.
Successful fund managers are the people who can say "well, yesterday I thought Bayer was a fantastic investment, but now I realise it's a pile of shit".
I look at my own behaviour and wonder about the rationality of that. In March and April I didn't go to work at all. A tank of fuel lasted a month. Visits to the shops were cut to the minimum, coffee shops went unvisited, contact with pals etc was by screen, my son was not at school, we were incredibly strict. Now I go into work for a couple of days every week, I am going in today, because I am more productive there (ie not sufficiently disciplined here), my wife and I went shopping in Edinburgh on Saturday for something we needed but went out for lunch and went to many other shops as well, a tank of fuel is back to a week's worth and of course my son is mixing with several hundred kids 5 days a week and then coming home. We are gambling in a way we didn't.
I thought the vaccine news would alter the mindset of people. It hasn't. One of the big questions to ask in the assessment of this whole thing should be, "how do we make people behave differently next time?"
At the morning meeting one day there was a stand up argument between George Soros and one of his top lieutenants. George Soros loved something and the more junior (but still very senior) guy hated them.
"The GM bonds are a pile of shit, and you're going to take this company down if you keep holding them!"
"You don't know what the fuck you're talking about."
Anyway...
A couple of hours later, everyone has calmed down a bit, and the more junior guy thinks he should head to George's office and patch things up.
"So George, I might have been a little overly passionate about the GM bonds"
"The what?"
"You know, the GM bonds I said were... errr... 'a pile of shit'... and maybe I should have been a bit more temperate in my language"
"Oh, I thought about what you said, and you were right, so I sold them."
Either we are doing a Canada and announcing a "new" deal which provides continuity. Or we are throwing a one line bill at Parliament to extend. Or we see the border shut down. As most Brexity punters wouldn't know what trade is if it was slipping them one, surely the path of least resistance is continuity.
The ERG will hate it, but if they hate it too much they can always be slung out of the party. The press will roundly back BJ and his patriotic triumph. The Nigel will huff and puff but "we got a deal" will be thrown back in his face and are punters really doing to go to war because the deal they voted for wasn't to the Nigel's taste?
C'mon Shagger. Choose the colour of lipstip for the pig and lets get on with it.
A one line codicil to the treaty extending the period to June 2023 can be agreed at 11:52pm on December 31.
Treaties are amended all the time. This one can as well,
They are however part of a whole industry that has a vested interest in encouraging over-trading.
The point that really needs hammering home with all of this is the damage being done to business. Whilst an 8 minutes to midnight amendment might be acceptable (!) in something like a treaty negotiation, this is trade. We are months and months past the point where business needed to know the confirmed arrangements. The cost of not having those agreed yet and the potential for 8 minutes to midnight shenanigans is something we will be paying for over the next decade.
“I wasn’t for the halo some years ago, but I [now] think it’s the greatest thing we have built in Formula One,”
- F1 driver Romain Grosjean, talking about the controversial (until yesterday) Halo safety device, that almost certainly saved his life and let him walk away from an horrific accident.
So it depends on the deal. If we get the continuity EEA pig lipstick deal that I expect, Labour MPs won't have that big a problem supporting it. If the deal is one that guarantees the closure of Nissan (as an example) then why would a Labour MP especially one up here vote for it? Yes many of their constituents don't believe the coming harm (though less of them than before), but once a bad deal harms them they will go apoplectic, and sophistry arguments about "eugh its the Tories deal not ours" won't cut it if they voted for it.
December 12, Boris announces victory. A deal has been agreed with the EU, and all the important points are in place.
However, it will take a couple of weeks to get all the i's dotted and the t's crossed, plus it has to go through 20-odd countries, and therefore we'll be putting in place a quick extension.
And let's just all rejoice that a deal - and not just any deal, but a deal favourable to Britain - has been agreed.
UK exports will drop drastically, prices in the shops will rocket and Sterling will fall out of bed... by the end of the first month it will be crisis summits and resignations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJUksEGh5OU
I don’t wish to romanticise the past. My small point is that we have not always been as shamefully governed as we are governed today. Countries change and not always for the better. Corruptions of public life in Britain that were once challenged now pass unpunished. The old codes that restrained the powerful have proved useless against politicians who say: “We can break them and no one can stop us.” Boris Johnson’s administration now lies as a matter of policy and a matter of course.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/28/politicians-were-once-held-to-account---now-nothing-stands-in-their-way
Not to mention the break up of the Kingdom.
So TBH this "dog ate my homework" approach won´t do... Our guys need to be on top of this, and they are not and the consequences include a lot more than six of the best.
Once a deal is agreed there is no reason not to have an "implementation" period to "transition" to the new arrangements. But the negotiations will be over.
The insanity of the sequencing May agreed with the EU was that we went into a transition without having a clue what we were transitioning into. If we get a deal now then a further six month to a year transition into the working new arrangements would be entirely reasonable.
https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1333322274389241856
https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1333322275433672706
Good morning, everybody.
At some point, someone needs to draw the line, and it’s not going to be the EU side.
The money isn’t been reduced, it’s being reallocated. The NFU is saying “this bit has gone down isn’t it terrible” without adding “but this bit has gone up”
Dictators have stability as there's none of that pesky democracy and risk of losing elections to upset the apple cart.
Instability is a strength not a weakness of democratic systems. It allows us to try different paths - and to correct course when we go down the wrong path (like the Americans electing Trump).
Trump appears consistent and dogmatic in pursuit of self-enrichment.
BoZo doesn't appear to have made himself rich (yet) but his chums have made out like bandits
Any fund manager who was doing anything other than playing the cycle is certifiable
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55124286
Imperial React Study - "Run alongside pollster Ipsos MORI"
Prof Paul Elliott, who leads the study, said the data offered "encouraging signs" for England's epidemic.
"These trends suggest that the tiered approach helped to curb infections in [the worst-affected areas] and that lockdown has added to this effect.
Right: off to bed for me.
The Johnson government made noises about walking in mid October. And in the summer.
If Johnson wanted, he could have filibustered the Benn bill and got a clean, no extension Brexit last year.
Now, if you were an EU negotiator, what would you conclude from these observations?
Now we have a leader standing up for the UK and playing our cards smartly, which is why Barnier is cross.
That may or may not be a good thing overall, but pretending it will not impact the viability of a large number of farms is disingenuous.
- I will give you a flat payment if you own lots of land. I don’t care that it benefits massive agribusinesses and wealthy aristocrats rather than the struggling farmers and I don’t give a shit about the environmental damage caused by monoculture and emphasis on volume of production
New system
- I am going to give the farming community the same amount of money but instead of doing a flat payment based on land I will require done environmentally beneficial work in return. This will create a community benefit
NFU (dominated by agribusiness)
- “Food production will be undermined”
Answer
- yes. There is a trade off between hyperindustrialised farming and environmental damage. Where you are on that spectrum is a political choice.
- I’m surprised that you want to subsidise wealthy agribusinesses to destroy the environment, but it takes all sorts
Nor would it need to since our constituencies are to be decided not on population but on the number of registered voters, and preferably as out of date as possible because that favours the Conservatives.