I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is a legal liability issue for the social media companies.
While The Strawbs were being tongue in cheek, that is a superb song for the Seventies zeitgeist. It was only when things went too far in the Winter of Discontent, that the unions became quite so unpopular.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is a legal liability issue for the social media companies.
I thiight they claimed that because they aren't publishers they aren't legally liable for what people post?
Derrick Evans, a West Virginia state legislator who recorded himself storming the Capitol on Wednesday, faces criminal charges, US officials said.
Evans has been charged in a criminal complaint with entering restricted area and entering the US Capitol, said Ken Kohl, a top official in the US attorney’s office for Washington, DC.
I just cannot understand anyone who is stupid enough to record themselves committing a criminal offence.
I mean, just - why?
Remember these are people who think 306 EVs is fewer than 232 EVs.
We can't be too superior as people over here have been arguing that 48%>52% for the last four years.
Indeed. And that 55/45 is so close that we need a re-run
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
No doubt he will say when he said they needed to go to the Capitol and that 'You'll have an illegitimate president, and its time somebody did something about it' he was only joshing, and it's vague anyway. So no biggy.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is a legal liability issue for the social media companies.
I thiight they claimed that because they aren't publishers they aren't legally liable for what people post?
They do but I suspect it could be a messy legal nightmare, it is the reason they threw the likes of Alex Jones off their platforms when he started getting sued.
They may have to spend millions of dollars trying to confirm their position.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is a legal liability issue for the social media companies.
Thought it was about who'll be chairing the Committees who regulate them? And ordering them to appear in front of them. Or is that overly cynical?
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
There's an increasing number of negative stories about Brexit appearing in the Express, with increasingly implausible spin.
To be fair, that was an excellent statement by Trump whether through gritted teeth or not.
Had that been the tone of his Presidency, he'd have been re-elected comfortably indeed bigly.
It's not an excellent statement if his character, history and actions make them patently self serving rather than indicative of any sincere wish for healing an unity. Words cannot simply be divorced from context.
If he said 'All you need is love' those would be nice words, but it would not be an excellent statement coming from him. Particularly when all his other words show his desire is the very opposite of healing and unity.
The words are fine, but as a statement they are not, from him.
I think the words were fine and had they been the tone of his Presidency from 2017 we would be in a very different place now.
The problem is Trump isn't a politician - that was one of the reasons why he won. In the land of free enterprise, the businessman is king. We've tried having business people in politics - Jesse Norman being one example. The problem is politics isn't business - in business, if you're the CEO you can command, control and coerce. In politics, you have to argue, persuade and convince. These aren't traits some business people possess and having been used to people jumping at their every command and hanging on their every word, they find the world of politics frustrating.
I've seen it when Councils have hired private sector people to run big departments or to be CEOs. They come in and treat the Councillors either like passive Directors or as employees and soon come unstuck.
As POTUS, Trump enjoyed more power than a British PM for example and as a businessman could treat the administration like a business which meant you were either in favour or you weren't. The turnover of key staff in the Trump WH was symbolic of this and I suspect the rush of "inside the Trump White House" stories from some of his former administration officials will lay bare just how he operated.
The drip-drip of stories over the next 6-12 months will further trash Trump's reputation and whether his diminishing brand of loyalists accept it or not, the country has moved on.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
Biden won by:
306 electoral votes to 232.
81 million popular votes to 74 million.
Seems pretty convincing to me!
It doesn't convince me, it concerns me. Trump is clearly a narcissistic, delusional, vulgar and incoherent lunatic, who wildly mishandled the Pandemic, and thus condemned hundreds of thousands of Americans to an unpleasant death. He has grovelled to dictators like Putin, Erdogan and Xi, while snubbing his close democratic allies. He laughs at the disabled and revels in misogyny and.... on and on and on.
He should have got 7 votes, but the culture wars are so vicious in America - and the Dems so despised by many ordinary Americans - he got 74 million, and a majority of whites.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
Biden won by:
306 electoral votes to 232.
81 million popular votes to 74 million.
Seems pretty convincing to me!
That's 10% more votes. Now, sure, Reagan's landslides were bigger.
But in terms of popular vote lead, this definitely top quartile in the last half century.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is a legal liability issue for the social media companies.
Thought it was about who'll be chairing the Committees who regulate them? And ordering them to appear in front of them. Or is that overly cynical?
Just seen the new Chris Witty ad....I don't think it is very good. What we really need is something like those AIDs ads. Instead we get Chris going this new variant is bad, stay home, wash your hands.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is worth noting what the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) want to do to reduce the power of "Big Tech".
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Whether he can or not, it is stark that Trump really doesn't seem to think more than 5 minutes ahead at any on time, whereas Pence and the others, people who intend to be around for decades or have been alrady, have focused on getting wins that will last and are now pivoting as much as they can for the new era.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is worth noting what the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) want to do to reduce the power of "Big Tech".
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
Mebbes, Difficult to worry about this as the world collapses.
I am, however, very much in favour of anti-monopolistic action against these huge tech companies. Facebook needs to be broken up, they should be forced to sell Insta and WhatsApp etc
Americans are good at this. They did it to the oil companies in the early 20th century. Please repeat.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is worth noting what the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) want to do to reduce the power of "Big Tech".
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
Every second post censored and replaced with the political equivalent of "that would be an ecumenical matter"?
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Probably the single most important vice President in US history. 1. He made clear he would not interfere with the EC votes. 2. He called out the National Guard. Could have been very different.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Whether he can or not, it is stark that Trump really doesn't seem to think more than 5 minutes ahead at any on time, whereas Pence and the others, people who intend to be around for decades or have been alrady, have focused on getting wins that will last and are now pivoting as much as they can for the new era.
Well indeed. Had Trump spent his final weeks in October getting a cheque out to everyone with his signature on it (metaphorically or literally, no idea how it works) as part of the Covid relief instead of concentrating on getting ACB confirmed then he might have actually won the election.
But Moscow Mitch isn't much better. Concentrating on rejecting further Covid relief and ensuring the GOP Senators take sole responsibility for that . . . in the days before Georgia goes back to the polls to determine who controls the Senate . . . was fantastic GOTV - for the Democrats.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is worth noting what the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) want to do to reduce the power of "Big Tech".
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
Mebbes, Difficult to worry about this as the world collapses.
I am, however, very much in favour of anti-monopolistic action against these huge tech companies. Facebook needs to be broken up, they should be forced to sell Insta and WhatsApp etc
Americans are good at this. They did it to the oil companies in the early 20th century. Please repeat.
Anyone who could afford to buy insta is probably already too big and powerful. They should be forced to float them instead.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
Biden won by:
306 electoral votes to 232.
81 million popular votes to 74 million.
Seems pretty convincing to me!
It doesn't convince me, it concerns me. Trump is clearly a narcissistic, delusional, vulgar and incoherent lunatic, who wildly mishandled the Pandemic, and thus condemned hundreds of thousands of Americans to an unpleasant death. He has grovelled to dictators like Putin, Erdogan and Xi, while snubbing his close democratic allies. He laughs at the disabled and revels in misogyny and.... on and on and on.
He should have got 7 votes, but the culture wars are so vicious in America - and the Dems so despised by many ordinary Americans - he got 74 million, and a majority of whites.
Deeply disturbing.
But Biden got 81 million votes.
51.3% v. 46.9% (inc. 3rd parties, natch). So roughly (very roughly) EURef territory.
BTW Even Hillary got more votes than Trump did in 2016!
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
Yes.
I don't think he envisages a comeback, but to put someone else in, sure.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
But if Miliband were determined to bring down Starmer, or Cameron to bring down Boris - that would be a huge political story.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Whether he can or not, it is stark that Trump really doesn't seem to think more than 5 minutes ahead at any on time, whereas Pence and the others, people who intend to be around for decades or have been already, have focused on getting wins that will last and are now pivoting as much as they can for the new era.
Perhaps that's what differentiates the businessman from the politician.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
Don't know. But I don't think Ms Cherry is anyone's poodle.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is worth noting what the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) want to do to reduce the power of "Big Tech".
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
Mebbes, Difficult to worry about this as the world collapses.
I am, however, very much in favour of anti-monopolistic action against these huge tech companies. Facebook needs to be broken up, they should be forced to sell Insta and WhatsApp etc
Americans are good at this. They did it to the oil companies in the early 20th century. Please repeat.
Anyone who could afford to buy insta is probably already too big and powerful. They should be forced to float them instead.
Fair.
Either way, Facebook seems clearly and dangerously monopolistic, to me. It buys up all rivals, so it has no rivals. Break it up.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Probably the single most important vice President in US history. 1. He made clear he would not interfere with the EC votes. 2. He called out the National Guard. Could have been very different.
Are we sure it was Pence called out the NG? If he did, that is very significant for the prospect of any Impeachment process, because it indicates that the President declined to do so, and that would plainly be grounds to impeach.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
But if Miliband were determined to bring down Starmer, or Cameron to bring down Boris - that would be a huge political story.
The point is, could they do it? I doubt it. And I rather doubt it also in Mr Salmond's case. You need a power base, crediblity, and enough support amongst the members in general. Messrs Johnson and Gove to overthrow Ms May, yes - but the current was with them.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Whether he can or not, it is stark that Trump really doesn't seem to think more than 5 minutes ahead at any on time, whereas Pence and the others, people who intend to be around for decades or have been already, have focused on getting wins that will last and are now pivoting as much as they can for the new era.
Perhaps that's what differentiates the businessman from the politician.
I would like to think businessmen think more than 5 minutes ahead. No one disputes he was intentionally a very atypical politician however.
I'm really not sure this stuff is wise. Eventually Republicans will retake power and they will have an urge for revenge on social media giants acting as state censors for Biden.
Democrats are acting as if they won the election by a landslide and they have nearly all of America on their side, against a tiny seditious minority.
The polls, unfortunately, show this is not the case.
America is headed for even greater polarisation - and conflict. Maybe it is inevitable.
It's like Brexit, but with 7 billion semi automatic machine guns.
It is worth noting what the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) want to do to reduce the power of "Big Tech".
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
Every second post censored and replaced with the political equivalent of "that would be an ecumenical matter"?
Trump may have got millions of votes. Not all of these are Trumpers though. Many would have voted for the Republican candidate, whether that be Trump, Romney or even Susan Collins (who could easily fit into the Democrats). It's the weakness of the two-party state. Gritted teeth time to deny the other side for some centre-right voters.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
There's an increasing number of negative stories about Brexit appearing in the Express, with increasingly implausible spin.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
Why the F are we exempting them from the Covid test rule???
Anybody coming into GB needs a test. Sorry NI, but this is nothing to do with GFA or Brexit; it is about the public health of 64m people trying to beat the Bastard Bug.
Why the F are we exempting them from the Covid test rule???
Anybody coming into GB needs a test. Sorry NI, but this is nothing to do with GFA or Brexit; it is about the public health of 64m people trying to beat the Bastard Bug.
But that would mean admitting there is a boirder down the Irish sea. Much mor eimportant not to have to do that.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Probably the single most important vice President in US history. 1. He made clear he would not interfere with the EC votes. 2. He called out the National Guard. Could have been very different.
Are we sure it was Pence called out the NG? If he did, that is very significant for the prospect of any Impeachment process, because it indicates that the President declined to do so, and that would plainly be grounds to impeach.
It was widely reported on the night. The Governors of Virginia and Maryland did too (one Dem, one Rep). Suggesting also the 25th was invoked de facto if not de jure.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
Where were you shipping to before?
Confused.
The UK and continental Europe mainly, though to other bits around the Middle East etc.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Also, it's rather meh - Theresa May may for all I know hate Mr Johnson's guts, but that is not news. Ano more than bear shite being discovered in Glentress Forest and Murdo Fraser supporting Rangers FC.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
Oddly enough, Pence comes out of this very well and he has played a shrewd game but he's a politician and Trump isn't.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
Probably the single most important vice President in US history. 1. He made clear he would not interfere with the EC votes. 2. He called out the National Guard. Could have been very different.
Are we sure it was Pence called out the NG? If he did, that is very significant for the prospect of any Impeachment process, because it indicates that the President declined to do so, and that would plainly be grounds to impeach.
It was widely reported on the night. The Governors of Virginia and Maryland did too (one Dem, one Rep). Suggesting also the 25th was invoked de facto if not de jure.
Sure it is being effectively invoked, although I do not think it will be done formally because it was never intended for these circumstances.
Impeachment was, and I'm coming round to the view that it may happen next week. I had thought it wasn't worth powder and shot and wold take too long, but if the Pence thing is right it seems the process could be implemented and concluded quickly.
Here's a good, succinct and quite definite article on the matter:
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Also, it's rather meh - Theresa May may for all I know hate Mr Johnson's guts, but that is not news. Ano more than bear shite being discovered in Glentress Forest and Murdo Fraser supporting Rangers FC.
Er, this is a bit different. Theresa May, God bless her, was not wrongly accused of sexual misconduct, bordering on rape, in a state-sanctioned legal case about her violently pegging a young male aide, apparently promulgated then concealed by Boris Johnson.
The Salmond Affair is a bit juicier than "meh". Tho I can see why you would like to minimalise it.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
I've personally been involved with producing the Everest of paperwork my employer now needs to export to Europe. It breaks my heart to know that we now have to ship to an outfit in the Netherlands, who we pay to distribute to their fellow Single Market members - a costly, bureaucratic, time-consuming and wasteful exercise of course, but it was the best available solution.
Where were you shipping to before?
Confused.
My guess would be that the shipped directly.
Yes, that's right. But we now have to pay for a proxy in the Netherlands to receive our shipments and then ship them to the customers that we'd previously shipped to directly. Of course it's a bureaucratic nonsense, but was actually the cheapest option.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Also, it's rather meh - Theresa May may for all I know hate Mr Johnson's guts, but that is not news. Ano more than bear shite being discovered in Glentress Forest and Murdo Fraser supporting Rangers FC.
Er, this is a bit different. Theresa May, God bless her, was not wrongly accused of sexual misconduct, bordering on rape, in a state-sanctioned legal case about her violently pegging a young male aide, apparently promulgated then concealed by Boris Johnson.
The Salmond Affair is a bit juicier than "meh". Tho I can see why you would like to minimalise it.
Otoh I can't see no reason why a dildo lapidarist and notable objective observer of the Scotch political scene would want to maximise it.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Also, it's rather meh - Theresa May may for all I know hate Mr Johnson's guts, but that is not news. Ano more than bear shite being discovered in Glentress Forest and Murdo Fraser supporting Rangers FC.
Er, this is a bit different. Theresa May, God bless her, was not wrongly accused of sexual misconduct, bordering on rape, in a state-sanctioned legal case about her violently pegging a young male aide, apparently promulgated then concealed by Boris Johnson.
The Salmond Affair is a bit juicier than "meh". Tho I can see why you would like to minimalise it.
Otoh I can't see no reason why a dildo lapidarist and notable objective observer of the Scotch political scene would want to maximise it.
It is an extremely juicy scandal. The SNP are "lucky" that it is being submerged by Covid, ditto the Brexiteers with the trading problems.
2021 is already replete with more irony than the average decade.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Also, it's rather meh - Theresa May may for all I know hate Mr Johnson's guts, but that is not news. Ano more than bear shite being discovered in Glentress Forest and Murdo Fraser supporting Rangers FC.
Er, this is a bit different. Theresa May, God bless her, was not wrongly accused of sexual misconduct, bordering on rape, in a state-sanctioned legal case about her violently pegging a young male aide, apparently promulgated then concealed by Boris Johnson.
The Salmond Affair is a bit juicier than "meh". Tho I can see why you would like to minimalise it.
Not trying to minimise it - but rather focussing on the likely political status and future career of the man, which is what you were asking about. Not the situation as a whole.
That is ,of course, only part of the entire situation, which has to play out.
I am sure I am about to regret asking, but can anyone explain to me the internal feud of the SNP in simple terms?
Salmond is a sex pest.
Sturgeon shopped him.
Salmond has not forgiven her.
But she only shopped him because he was wanting to restand as an MSP after losing his Westminster seat in 2017.
I’m not sure the ‘why’ matters. It’s the ‘shopped’ that he’s narked about.
Truthfully, to say the least it doesn’t show either of them in a flattering light, but given the paucity of opposition i can’t see it having much electoral impact.
The thing that would be deeply damaging to Sturgeon is if she'd known about the allegations for a decade before shopping Salmond.
It would put a very different light on things.
Let it not be failed to be said though that Salmond, as well as being a sex pest, is a grade A idiot. I can't think of anyone who has fallen faster in my eyes than him.
Does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst the Nits? I know a number of them quietly despise Sturgeon (cf malcomg's characteristically gentle descriptions of her). Is Eck a Prince across the Water for some?
You're confusing SNP members with Yes voters generally. Not the same thing by any means.
OK, how about..... does he still have a hardcore fanclub amongst Yes voters?
Difficult to tell because of various factors. But in a sense, what is the point? Things have moved on. He's not an active pol now. AFAIK he's not standing as a candidate for any election. And we're not Tories that give peerages out like sweeties, albeit very expensive sweeties. The Unionist (especially English) media focus on him is in a sense like their focus on Messrs Sillars and Bell. Like talking about Mr E. MIliband or Mr Cameron in terms of current English election politics.
I've no doubt he is yesterday's hero, however my question is: does he have enough of a fanbase for him to delude himself (he is famously vain) that he will bring down Sturgeon in the belief that he, or his acolyte Cherry, can take over?
It may not be huge news around the world or affect the Uk Govt, but in Scotland, if this is just the starting pistol, it's going to be massive.
This was promised in both 2020 and 2019.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Also, it's rather meh - Theresa May may for all I know hate Mr Johnson's guts, but that is not news. Ano more than bear shite being discovered in Glentress Forest and Murdo Fraser supporting Rangers FC.
Er, this is a bit different. Theresa May, God bless her, was not wrongly accused of sexual misconduct, bordering on rape, in a state-sanctioned legal case about her violently pegging a young male aide, apparently promulgated then concealed by Boris Johnson.
The Salmond Affair is a bit juicier than "meh". Tho I can see why you would like to minimalise it.
Not trying to minimise it - but rather focussing on the likely political status and future career of the man, which is what you were asking about. Not the situation as a whole.
That is ,of course, only part of the entire situation, which has to play out.
Fair nuff. This is the first time in years that I have sensed the SNP hegemony might be threatened. The timing is all wrong for Sturgeon.
To be fair to the Nats, however, their incredible supremacy at Holyrood has proved me wrong time and again, and just continues. but this feels dangerous. We shall see.
Comments
306 electoral votes to 232.
81 million popular votes to 74 million.
Seems pretty convincing to me!
They may have to spend millions of dollars trying to confirm their position.
Or is that overly cynical?
The problem is Trump isn't a politician - that was one of the reasons why he won. In the land of free enterprise, the businessman is king. We've tried having business people in politics - Jesse Norman being one example. The problem is politics isn't business - in business, if you're the CEO you can command, control and coerce. In politics, you have to argue, persuade and convince. These aren't traits some business people possess and having been used to people jumping at their every command and hanging on their every word, they find the world of politics frustrating.
I've seen it when Councils have hired private sector people to run big departments or to be CEOs. They come in and treat the Councillors either like passive Directors or as employees and soon come unstuck.
As POTUS, Trump enjoyed more power than a British PM for example and as a businessman could treat the administration like a business which meant you were either in favour or you weren't. The turnover of key staff in the Trump WH was symbolic of this and I suspect the rush of "inside the Trump White House" stories from some of his former administration officials will lay bare just how he operated.
The drip-drip of stories over the next 6-12 months will further trash Trump's reputation and whether his diminishing brand of loyalists accept it or not, the country has moved on.
He should have got 7 votes, but the culture wars are so vicious in America - and the Dems so despised by many ordinary Americans - he got 74 million, and a majority of whites.
Deeply disturbing.
But in terms of popular vote lead, this definitely top quartile in the last half century.
The ultra-loyalists may damn Pence in perpetuity but he has positioned himself well for the 2024 primaries and could still run in 2028 if he decided not to contest 2024.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1347664568844242947
maybe they should try that again?
26,000 cases. 1,150 deaths. Today.
They want to repeal Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act. This gives site owners (like OGH) broad immunity from what is posted by their users on their platform.
In other words, if you were to libel Jeremy Corbyn by calling him "peace loving" or "not anti-semitic", and he chose to sue, then the site that hosted the content would also be liable. In other words, it would essentially require a Twitter or Facebook to actively moderate posts to avoid legal jeopardy.
Think about that for a second. It'd be a massive hassle for pb. But what would it mean for The Daily Stormer? Or Twitter re DJT?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55597263
Though the kids might wonder why Grampy Rabbit is telling them to stay at home.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55593864
I am, however, very much in favour of anti-monopolistic action against these huge tech companies. Facebook needs to be broken up, they should be forced to sell Insta and WhatsApp etc
Americans are good at this. They did it to the oil companies in the early 20th century. Please repeat.
https://twitter.com/GaSecofState/status/1347354911407792130/photo/1
1. He made clear he would not interfere with the EC votes.
2. He called out the National Guard.
Could have been very different.
But Moscow Mitch isn't much better. Concentrating on rejecting further Covid relief and ensuring the GOP Senators take sole responsibility for that . . . in the days before Georgia goes back to the polls to determine who controls the Senate . . . was fantastic GOTV - for the Democrats.
That's awful
I loved the Seven Up Series.
And Gorky Park. And even The World is Not Enough was entertaining enough in places.
No, to answer your follow up question, it is rather small.
51.3% v. 46.9% (inc. 3rd parties, natch). So roughly (very roughly) EURef territory.
BTW Even Hillary got more votes than Trump did in 2016!
I don't think he envisages a comeback, but to put someone else in, sure.
Either way, Facebook seems clearly and dangerously monopolistic, to me. It buys up all rivals, so it has no rivals. Break it up.
https://twitter.com/topfotogmw/status/1347669485247934470
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/covid-19-south-african-strain-detected-for-first-time-in-ireland-1.4453160
Why the F are we exempting them from the Covid test rule???
Confused.
Suggesting also the 25th was invoked de facto if not de jure.
Im not saying it won't happen in 2021 but fuck me it's been trailed for years now.
Sure it is being effectively invoked, although I do not think it will be done formally because it was never intended for these circumstances.
Impeachment was, and I'm coming round to the view that it may happen next week. I had thought it wasn't worth powder and shot and wold take too long, but if the Pence thing is right it seems the process could be implemented and concluded quickly.
Here's a good, succinct and quite definite article on the matter:
https://lawandcrime.com/opinion/the-house-is-moving-quickly-towards-a-second-trump-impeachment-this-is-the-evidence-it-must-focus-on/?utm_source=mostpopular
The Salmond Affair is a bit juicier than "meh". Tho I can see why you would like to minimalise it.
2021 is already replete with more irony than the average decade.
That is ,of course, only part of the entire situation, which has to play out.
https://twitter.com/darrengrimes_/status/1347627781895675905?s=20
To be fair to the Nats, however, their incredible supremacy at Holyrood has proved me wrong time and again, and just continues. but this feels dangerous. We shall see.