I don't think the Republicans have thought through what comes next if they try and game an election result where they're clearly the minority in the country.
What comes next?
It worked out fine in 2000 and 2016 for them, and if they had been better organized the assault on the Capitol Building might have seen Trump past inauguration day.
What would have happened if the Commander in Chief had gone rogue with the party machine and the SC behind him? More hand wringing from the Democrats and letters of outrage to the Washington Post and New York Times.
I know I can safely disregard your contributions on this subject when you post stuff like that.
The Republicans the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2016 (yes yes, i know not the national popular vote but they did in the electoral college and it was therefore perfectly legal and constitutional).
It will be perfectly "legal" if they were to suppress voting through state legislatures to give them the results they required in the EC.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Agreed, but there's an extreme Democratic wing obsessed with tearing down the founding fathers and the story of the republic as well.
Is there, bollocks!
So the statues coming down all over the USA are totally made up then?
We'll know America is able to avoid a civil war when Republicans speak out against ballot rigging and people like you speak out against ripping apart its cultural fabric rather than exclaiming it's all made up.
There you go again with your statues. The AOC wing of the Dems see the statues issue as relevant to the subjugation of a vast swathe of US society. Perhaps AOC will concede your statues when an innocent guy no longer gets shot in his own apartment because a lady cop assumes he is in hers, or Sandra Bland doesn't die in a police cell because she had a broken tail light.
Thanks, so you admit it's happening after all. I seen you've now moved onto "but it's all ok because.."
My point is that for a stand-off to end both sides need to be willing to march away from their extremes and be willing to compromise.
At the moment, they just want to win.
It seems to be a pretty unfair stand off. Take down our statue of Robert E. Lee and we'll shoot your woman and children.
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
To misquote Josef Stalin, how many divisions does Ursula von der Leyen have?
Because Lukashenko recognises nothing other than brute force.
Greece and Lithuania are both members of NATO, whose response would be more to the point. Ryanair of course is based in Ireland which, unwisely, is not in NATO. The RoI response will be interesting.
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
Former Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf, as usual, shouted loudest of all on is his favourite outlet, Twitter.
But is there not a hint of double standards about his actions? Less than two days before, he roundly applauded a crowd of at least 200 who surrounded a Home Office van to prevent two men being deported.
While the two events are obviously different, they are exactly the same in that the crowds blatantly breached the current laws on crowds gathering.
The Home Office van incident took place in one of the postcodes at the centre of the worrying rise in Covid cases that has seen Glasgow kept in Level 3.
It put police officers at risk of catching Covid as, despite the protestations of some, a baying mob surrounding a police van cannot possibly do it at a safe distance, any more than drunken hooligans in Rangers tops can in George Square.
But Mr Yousaf not only condoned people breaking the law but almost egged them on to do so. This from the man who was ultimately in charge of Police Scotland at the time.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
When one of the gamier PB reactionaries says 'the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two', I think you have to accept that as the equivalent of GOP are totally corrupt cnuts and take the win.
I don't think reactionaries get any gamier than you.
At least you've taken a break from blathering about Woke and Green fascists and the vegan plot to put meat eaters in camps.
Yep. Just waiting for you to take one from scourging the internet for anyone hanging out near a union jack so you can post it on here and call them a "loyalist".
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
Just had a look at the detail of the India variant vaccine study, it looks like there is basically no efficacy dilution at all. For Pfizer we move down from 91% to 88% but with a much wider CI and for AZ the data is currently only based on the shorter gap dosing schedule rather than the 10-12 week one and that comes out at 60% just 2% lower than the 62% we have with original COVID on the like for like comparison.
It's also interesting to look at the data from Bolton, the symptomatic case rate seems to have peaked a few days ago and is now falling again. The virus is clearly now running into too many unviable hosts that have been vaccinated to enough of a degree that halts the growth rate.
Do you think evidence will be enough to shut up the whining covidiots?
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
I've yet to hear a smidgeon of criticism from SCons about a drunken mob assaulting police, abusing ambulance crews, battering the feck out of each other, pishing in the street, vandalising council property, dropping tons of litter and smashed glass and bellowing out sectarian hate in George Sq. Twice.
I guess once you've gone BJ cultist you'll pretty much tolerate anything.
I don't think the Republicans have thought through what comes next if they try and game an election result where they're clearly the minority in the country.
What comes next?
It worked out fine in 2000 and 2016 for them, and if they had been better organized the assault on the Capitol Building might have seen Trump past inauguration day.
What would have happened if the Commander in Chief had gone rogue with the party machine and the SC behind him? More hand wringing from the Democrats and letters of outrage to the Washington Post and New York Times.
I know I can safely disregard your contributions on this subject when you post stuff like that.
The Republicans the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2016 (yes yes, i know not the national popular vote but they did in the electoral college and it was therefore perfectly legal and constitutional).
It will be perfectly "legal" if they were to suppress voting through state legislatures to give them the results they required in the EC.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Agreed, but there's an extreme Democratic wing obsessed with tearing down the founding fathers and the story of the republic as well.
Is there, bollocks!
So the statues coming down all over the USA are totally made up then?
We'll know America is able to avoid a civil war when Republicans speak out against ballot rigging and people like you speak out against ripping apart its cultural fabric rather than exclaiming it's all made up.
There you go again with your statues. The AOC wing of the Dems see the statues issue as relevant to the subjugation of a vast swathe of US society. Perhaps AOC will concede your statues when an innocent guy no longer gets shot in his own apartment because a lady cop assumes he is in hers, or Sandra Bland doesn't die in a police cell because she had a broken tail light.
Thanks, so you admit it's happening after all. I seen you've now moved onto "but it's all ok because.."
My point is that for a stand-off to end both sides need to be willing to march away from their extremes and be willing to compromise.
At the moment, they just want to win.
It seems to be a pretty unfair stand off. Take down our statue of Robert E. Lee and we'll shoot your woman and children.
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
Why do you think that banning Gary Glitter songs is a good idea?
Genuine question....
1) Damnatio memoriae ? 2) Because he gets paid per song play? (the reason I'd go for) 3) ??
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
I've yet to hear a smidgeon of criticism from SCons about a drunken mob assaulting police, abusing ambulance crews, battering the feck out of each other, pishing in the street, vandalising council property, dropping tons of litter and smashed glass and bellowing out sectarian hate in George Sq. Twice.
I guess once you've gone BJ cultist you'll pretty much tolerate anything.
Are you seriously still banging on about Rangers FC wins?? Seriously, get over it.
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
I've yet to hear a smidgeon of criticism from SCons about a drunken mob assaulting police, abusing ambulance crews, battering the feck out of each other, pishing in the street, vandalising council property, dropping tons of litter and smashed glass and bellowing out sectarian hate in George Sq. Twice.
I guess once you've gone BJ cultist you'll pretty much tolerate anything.
If they got outraged about that surely they’d be outraged every Saturday night?
FT - Liverpool get Champions League. Feel sorry for @Foxy that Leicester missed out, was hoping they'd get the 4th spot.
Other than the results, it was very good after a very bizarre season in the final game of the season to hear authentic cheers of You'll Never Walk Alone.
Football isn't football without the fans. Hopefully when the new season starts in August it will be with 100% capacity crowds in the stadia and we never need to have empty ones again.
Just had a look at the detail of the India variant vaccine study, it looks like there is basically no efficacy dilution at all. For Pfizer we move down from 91% to 88% but with a much wider CI and for AZ the data is currently only based on the shorter gap dosing schedule rather than the 10-12 week one and that comes out at 60% just 2% lower than the 62% we have with original COVID on the like for like comparison.
It's also interesting to look at the data from Bolton, the symptomatic case rate seems to have peaked a few days ago and is now falling again. The virus is clearly now running into too many unviable hosts that have been vaccinated to enough of a degree that halts the growth rate.
Do you think evidence will be enough to shut up the whining covidiots?
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
There’s a lot of incentive for commentators on the right to 'big up' the woke threat in order to justify undermining democracy in the US. From the outside it seems that without rampant gerry mandering & voter suppression, the Republican Party in it’s current form would have no chance of victory in any national election - it’s only through a continuous campaign of fear & loathing targetting their own supporters that they can justify these anti-democratic policies.
The Left AND the Right in America are engaged in an insane Arms Race of Stupidity. One minute the Left does something crazy and Woke which will only provoke Republicans, a minute later the Republicans are duly provoked, and they do something crazy, in response.
I really fear for the country. So polarised. Social media must take a lot of the blame
The solution is a moderate Republican president. To calm the Right, but make peace with the Left. Doesn't seem likely
The problem being that 'moderate' Republicans pander to the rich and big business.
In many ways Trump, while being deranged and corrupt, was more moderate than the traditional GOP.
There is a category error in some of the comments here. Objecting to a woke agenda or worrying about big business getting favo(u)rs are both things that candidates can raise in elections and seek support to oppose. trying to rig the system so your opponents can't vote is Something Else.
Just had a look at the detail of the India variant vaccine study, it looks like there is basically no efficacy dilution at all. For Pfizer we move down from 91% to 88% but with a much wider CI and for AZ the data is currently only based on the shorter gap dosing schedule rather than the 10-12 week one and that comes out at 60% just 2% lower than the 62% we have with original COVID on the like for like comparison.
It's also interesting to look at the data from Bolton, the symptomatic case rate seems to have peaked a few days ago and is now falling again. The virus is clearly now running into too many unviable hosts that have been vaccinated to enough of a degree that halts the growth rate.
Do you think evidence will be enough to shut up the whining covidiots?
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
Were any of the cab drivers Albanian?
If they were, they had very good cockney accents....
I don't think the Republicans have thought through what comes next if they try and game an election result where they're clearly the minority in the country.
What comes next?
It worked out fine in 2000 and 2016 for them, and if they had been better organized the assault on the Capitol Building might have seen Trump past inauguration day.
What would have happened if the Commander in Chief had gone rogue with the party machine and the SC behind him? More hand wringing from the Democrats and letters of outrage to the Washington Post and New York Times.
I know I can safely disregard your contributions on this subject when you post stuff like that.
The Republicans the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2016 (yes yes, i know not the national popular vote but they did in the electoral college and it was therefore perfectly legal and constitutional).
It will be perfectly "legal" if they were to suppress voting through state legislatures to give them the results they required in the EC.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Agreed, but there's an extreme Democratic wing obsessed with tearing down the founding fathers and the story of the republic as well.
Is there, bollocks!
So the statues coming down all over the USA are totally made up then?
We'll know America is able to avoid a civil war when Republicans speak out against ballot rigging and people like you speak out against ripping apart its cultural fabric rather than exclaiming it's all made up.
There you go again with your statues. The AOC wing of the Dems see the statues issue as relevant to the subjugation of a vast swathe of US society. Perhaps AOC will concede your statues when an innocent guy no longer gets shot in his own apartment because a lady cop assumes he is in hers, or Sandra Bland doesn't die in a police cell because she had a broken tail light.
Thanks, so you admit it's happening after all. I seen you've now moved onto "but it's all ok because.."
My point is that for a stand-off to end both sides need to be willing to march away from their extremes and be willing to compromise.
At the moment, they just want to win.
It seems to be a pretty unfair stand off. Take down our statue of Robert E. Lee and we'll shoot your woman and children.
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
Why do you think that banning Gary Glitter songs is a good idea?
Genuine question....
1) Damnatio memoriae ? 2) Because he gets paid per song play? (the reason I'd go for) 3) ??
Just had a look at the detail of the India variant vaccine study, it looks like there is basically no efficacy dilution at all. For Pfizer we move down from 91% to 88% but with a much wider CI and for AZ the data is currently only based on the shorter gap dosing schedule rather than the 10-12 week one and that comes out at 60% just 2% lower than the 62% we have with original COVID on the like for like comparison.
It's also interesting to look at the data from Bolton, the symptomatic case rate seems to have peaked a few days ago and is now falling again. The virus is clearly now running into too many unviable hosts that have been vaccinated to enough of a degree that halts the growth rate.
Do you think evidence will be enough to shut up the whining covidiots?
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
Other than an Indian variant spike in Bedford, there appear to be no local authority areas left south of Manchester with case rates over 50 per 100,000. Most are considerably lower.
I'm growing increasingly optimistic that Covid is, in essence, done. We may get a bit more of it come the Winter, but no more tsunami waves. The vaccines haven't quite accomplished their task - we need to get through the youngsters first - but the emergency is finished. Social distancing should be consigned to the dustbin of history on June 21st.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
Can Somebody Remind me what the ASL is/are?
American Sign Language.
Getting the deaf able to communicate is too woke for some.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
Can Somebody Remind me what the ASL is/are?
ASL used to refer to Age Sex Location. I'd don't know what it means in this context.
Just had a look at the detail of the India variant vaccine study, it looks like there is basically no efficacy dilution at all. For Pfizer we move down from 91% to 88% but with a much wider CI and for AZ the data is currently only based on the shorter gap dosing schedule rather than the 10-12 week one and that comes out at 60% just 2% lower than the 62% we have with original COVID on the like for like comparison.
It's also interesting to look at the data from Bolton, the symptomatic case rate seems to have peaked a few days ago and is now falling again. The virus is clearly now running into too many unviable hosts that have been vaccinated to enough of a degree that halts the growth rate.
Do you think evidence will be enough to shut up the whining covidiots?
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
Encouraging to here that's happening in London too,
Just had a look at the detail of the India variant vaccine study, it looks like there is basically no efficacy dilution at all. For Pfizer we move down from 91% to 88% but with a much wider CI and for AZ the data is currently only based on the shorter gap dosing schedule rather than the 10-12 week one and that comes out at 60% just 2% lower than the 62% we have with original COVID on the like for like comparison.
It's also interesting to look at the data from Bolton, the symptomatic case rate seems to have peaked a few days ago and is now falling again. The virus is clearly now running into too many unviable hosts that have been vaccinated to enough of a degree that halts the growth rate.
Do you think evidence will be enough to shut up the whining covidiots?
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
Other than an Indian variant spike in Bedford, there appear to be no local authority areas left south of Manchester with case rates over 50 per 100,000. Most are considerably lower.
I'm growing increasingly optimistic that Covid is, in essence, done. We may get a bit more of it come the Winter, but no more tsunami waves. The vaccines haven't quite accomplished their task - we need to get through the youngsters first - but the emergency is finished. Social distancing should be consigned to the dustbin of history on June 21st.
Along with SAGE, the DfE, OFSTED, OFQUAL, the DDCMS, and several police officers.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
I said the Republicans are the worst offenders. That does not make the Democrats blameless.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
I don't think the Republicans have thought through what comes next if they try and game an election result where they're clearly the minority in the country.
What comes next?
It worked out fine in 2000 and 2016 for them, and if they had been better organized the assault on the Capitol Building might have seen Trump past inauguration day.
What would have happened if the Commander in Chief had gone rogue with the party machine and the SC behind him? More hand wringing from the Democrats and letters of outrage to the Washington Post and New York Times.
I know I can safely disregard your contributions on this subject when you post stuff like that.
The Republicans the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2016 (yes yes, i know not the national popular vote but they did in the electoral college and it was therefore perfectly legal and constitutional).
It will be perfectly "legal" if they were to suppress voting through state legislatures to give them the results they required in the EC.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Agreed, but there's an extreme Democratic wing obsessed with tearing down the founding fathers and the story of the republic as well.
Is there, bollocks!
So the statues coming down all over the USA are totally made up then?
We'll know America is able to avoid a civil war when Republicans speak out against ballot rigging and people like you speak out against ripping apart its cultural fabric rather than exclaiming it's all made up.
There you go again with your statues. The AOC wing of the Dems see the statues issue as relevant to the subjugation of a vast swathe of US society. Perhaps AOC will concede your statues when an innocent guy no longer gets shot in his own apartment because a lady cop assumes he is in hers, or Sandra Bland doesn't die in a police cell because she had a broken tail light.
Thanks, so you admit it's happening after all. I seen you've now moved onto "but it's all ok because.."
My point is that for a stand-off to end both sides need to be willing to march away from their extremes and be willing to compromise.
At the moment, they just want to win.
It seems to be a pretty unfair stand off. Take down our statue of Robert E. Lee and we'll shoot your woman and children.
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
Why do you think that banning Gary Glitter songs is a good idea?
Genuine question....
1) Damnatio memoriae ? 2) Because he gets paid per song play? (the reason I'd go for) 3) ??
Because his music is a bit shit?
Well, if we start banning all the music that is a bit shit....
The question stands. I have always been puzzled by the idea that an artists behaviour effects the value of their work and visa versa.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
Can Somebody Remind me what the ASL is/are?
ASL used to refer to Age Sex Location. I'd don't know what it means in this context.
I assume that's to avoid timewasters so one can "cut to the chase" on dating websites and the like..
I don't think the Republicans have thought through what comes next if they try and game an election result where they're clearly the minority in the country.
What comes next?
It worked out fine in 2000 and 2016 for them, and if they had been better organized the assault on the Capitol Building might have seen Trump past inauguration day.
What would have happened if the Commander in Chief had gone rogue with the party machine and the SC behind him? More hand wringing from the Democrats and letters of outrage to the Washington Post and New York Times.
I know I can safely disregard your contributions on this subject when you post stuff like that.
The Republicans the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2016 (yes yes, i know not the national popular vote but they did in the electoral college and it was therefore perfectly legal and constitutional).
It will be perfectly "legal" if they were to suppress voting through state legislatures to give them the results they required in the EC.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Agreed, but there's an extreme Democratic wing obsessed with tearing down the founding fathers and the story of the republic as well.
Is there, bollocks!
So the statues coming down all over the USA are totally made up then?
We'll know America is able to avoid a civil war when Republicans speak out against ballot rigging and people like you speak out against ripping apart its cultural fabric rather than exclaiming it's all made up.
There you go again with your statues. The AOC wing of the Dems see the statues issue as relevant to the subjugation of a vast swathe of US society. Perhaps AOC will concede your statues when an innocent guy no longer gets shot in his own apartment because a lady cop assumes he is in hers, or Sandra Bland doesn't die in a police cell because she had a broken tail light.
Thanks, so you admit it's happening after all. I seen you've now moved onto "but it's all ok because.."
My point is that for a stand-off to end both sides need to be willing to march away from their extremes and be willing to compromise.
At the moment, they just want to win.
It seems to be a pretty unfair stand off. Take down our statue of Robert E. Lee and we'll shoot your woman and children.
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
Why do you think that banning Gary Glitter songs is a good idea?
Genuine question....
1) Damnatio memoriae ? 2) Because he gets paid per song play? (the reason I'd go for) 3) ??
Because his music is a bit shit?
Well, if we start banning all the music that is a bit shit....
The world would be a better, more tuneful place
Edit - in all seriousness, the fact that his music isn’t exactly brilliant means that given his disgrace there’s no reason to keep playing it. Sometimes for genuinely brilliant art people can make that kind of separation. But for Glitter? Nah.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
I’m surprised record labels still exist. They’re surely a relic by now?
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
I've yet to hear a smidgeon of criticism from SCons about a drunken mob assaulting police, abusing ambulance crews, battering the feck out of each other, pishing in the street, vandalising council property, dropping tons of litter and smashed glass and bellowing out sectarian hate in George Sq. Twice.
I guess once you've gone BJ cultist you'll pretty much tolerate anything.
What's Boris got to do with what your Scottish compatriots are doing in Glasgow on a night out?
Just so I understand how this game works, the media advisor of Independent SAGE is writing pieces for the Observer where Independent SAGE are quoted at length, without mentioning her role in the organisation?
I don't think the Republicans have thought through what comes next if they try and game an election result where they're clearly the minority in the country.
What comes next?
It worked out fine in 2000 and 2016 for them, and if they had been better organized the assault on the Capitol Building might have seen Trump past inauguration day.
What would have happened if the Commander in Chief had gone rogue with the party machine and the SC behind him? More hand wringing from the Democrats and letters of outrage to the Washington Post and New York Times.
I know I can safely disregard your contributions on this subject when you post stuff like that.
The Republicans the Presidential elections in 2000 and 2016 (yes yes, i know not the national popular vote but they did in the electoral college and it was therefore perfectly legal and constitutional).
It will be perfectly "legal" if they were to suppress voting through state legislatures to give them the results they required in the EC.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Agreed, but there's an extreme Democratic wing obsessed with tearing down the founding fathers and the story of the republic as well.
Is there, bollocks!
So the statues coming down all over the USA are totally made up then?
We'll know America is able to avoid a civil war when Republicans speak out against ballot rigging and people like you speak out against ripping apart its cultural fabric rather than exclaiming it's all made up.
There you go again with your statues. The AOC wing of the Dems see the statues issue as relevant to the subjugation of a vast swathe of US society. Perhaps AOC will concede your statues when an innocent guy no longer gets shot in his own apartment because a lady cop assumes he is in hers, or Sandra Bland doesn't die in a police cell because she had a broken tail light.
Thanks, so you admit it's happening after all. I seen you've now moved onto "but it's all ok because.."
My point is that for a stand-off to end both sides need to be willing to march away from their extremes and be willing to compromise.
At the moment, they just want to win.
It seems to be a pretty unfair stand off. Take down our statue of Robert E. Lee and we'll shoot your woman and children.
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
Why do you think that banning Gary Glitter songs is a good idea?
Genuine question....
1) Damnatio memoriae ? 2) Because he gets paid per song play? (the reason I'd go for) 3) ??
Because his music is a bit shit?
Well, if we start banning all the music that is a bit shit....
The world would be a better, more tuneful place
Perhaps.
The next UK national anthem should be composed by System of A Down.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
Can Somebody Remind me what the ASL is/are?
ASL used to refer to Age Sex Location. I'd don't know what it means in this context.
I assume that's to avoid timewasters so one can "cut to the chase" on dating websites and the like..
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
I think the Democrats now require a lead of 3 - 4% nationally to carry the Electoral College. That's not down to gerrymandering so much as clustering. The Democrats run up leads that are far too good for their own good in big cities.
If the Republicans were not in the habit of choosing loons, they'd have a hammer=lock on the Senate, given the overrepresentation of small States.
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
I've yet to hear a smidgeon of criticism from SCons .
I didn't know SCons were in government, let alone the (then) Justice Secretary with responsibility for policing.
Just so I understand how this game works, the media advisor of Independent SAGE is writing pieces for the Observer where Independent SAGE are quoted at length, without mentioning her role in the organisation?
Just so I understand how this game works, the media advisor of Independent SAGE is writing pieces for the Observer where Independent SAGE are quoted at length, without mentioning her role in the organisation?
Standard - how many times have you seen an interview with an "expert in the field" who turns out to be political activist for one side or another, and just happened to forget to mention this?
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
It's a bit of a myth that we're crap at it.
We've won it 5 times, finished second a record 15 times and have the record for the longest-running string of Top 5 placings. Also, we were 3rd in 2002 and 5th in 2009. Our record has only been markedly poor since 2012 - but even then we were mid table in 2017.
I think it's because we simply expect to be in the top 5 every year because of our strong music scene but also think the whole thing is a bit of a joke.
To misquote Josef Stalin, how many divisions does Ursula von der Leyen have?
Because Lukashenko recognises nothing other than brute force.
Greece and Lithuania are both members of NATO, whose response would be more to the point. Ryanair of course is based in Ireland which, unwisely, is not in NATO. The RoI response will be interesting.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Yeah and this is why we need to embrace the novelty act. We'll never come anywhere other than last with earnest sounding, seriously written songs and singers. Anyone who has any level of musical talent in the UK will go and get a record deal, one of my middle aged friends is in a band and they have a record deal and are planning a UK and European tour this autumn. They're a tiny band but really fun and very talented.
The other issue is that UK music is not compatible with Eurovision. Not enough trashy pop outside of the charts and no chart act like Ed Sheeran would do it.
The lab leak theory is the only one of @Leon 's conspiracy theories I'm open-minded about to be honest.
We know the lab is in Wuhan. We know the virus originated in Wuhan. We know they do viral research at the lab in Wuhan. We know China won't let the WHO anywhere near the lab. And we know China silenced scientists and doctors who tried to speak out earlier.
Probably still correlation not causation but possibly not too.
Yes, this is one where I'm certainly more open to it than I was.
Not, I hasten to add the idea that this is a "manufactured" virus or that the Chinese somehow leaked it deliberately. But the idea that the security conditions at the lab were not what they should have been, and either an employee got bitten by a bat and covered it up, or a vial got broken and then wasn't cleaned up as it should have been.
Those are quite plausible scenarios given:
(a) Wuhan was the biggest outbreak, and the centre of (bat) coronavirus studies is in the city and (b) The Wuhan strain does not appear to be the oldest in circulation
What we *do* know for certain is that (a) this originated in China, and (b) the Chinese have lied and obfuscated.
Now, this doesn't mean it certainly leaked from the lab. It's perfectly possible that someone flew on a plane to Wuhan with it, and infected 40 people on the flight, and that's why it spread as it did from there. But - on the balance of probabilities - given where the lab is located, it seems more likely it escaped from there.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Yeah and this is why we need to embrace the novelty act. We'll never come anywhere other than last with earnest sounding, seriously written songs and singers. Anyone who has any level of musical talent in the UK will go and get a record deal, one of my middle aged friends is in a band and they have a record deal and are planning a UK and European tour this autumn. They're a tiny band but really fun and very talented.
The other issue is that UK music is not compatible with Eurovision. Not enough trashy pop outside of the charts and no chart act like Ed Sheeran would do it.
This thread seemed pretty convincing to me- basically, Eurovision songs have moved on, and the UK keeps entering songs that would have won in the 80s/90s.
A comprehensive free trade deal between the UK and Norway is at risk of collapsing as the Christian Democrat party fears such a pact would hit farmers in Scandinavia’s richest country too hard.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Disturbing. Where is ASL? UK or America?
American School in London
(As a leading indicator look for schools appointing a director of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. Or as the muppets at ASL called it without thinking of the acronym “director of Diversity of Institutional Equity”)
No, I never dismissed the lab leak theory. On the initial, now clearly inaccurate, data, the market hypothesis did seem the most reasonable, but as far back as 2015 I warned of the potential culture issues with regards to safety in BSL4 labs (quoted as such in Nature, no less).
I dismissed the design for purpose theory, but not other possibilities, such as accidental release or even the virus evolving in the lab. Indeed, back in April last year, I wrote a risk management scenario for use in lab training on the possibility of unintended evolution of the virus through propagation in human lung epithelial cells.
There are multiple instances of me saying similar to the NYT, WP and NPR, but I can't be bothered to find them. I have also consistently pointed out Peter Daszak's conflicts of interest and how absurd it was that he was on the WHO team.
The key attributes of a conspiracy theory: 1. Specificity 2. Plausibility 3. Undeniability 4. No real evidence for the theory in preference to other more usual explanations
The Lab Leak theory meets all four criteria. The assertion is highly specific, not only identifying the institute but suggesting a particular employee of it being responsible. A lab accidentally releasing a virus into the wild is very plausible, more so than associates of Prince Charles murdering Diana. The data isn't there to definitively prove a specific alternative explanation. From what I have seen at least, the Lab Leak is nothing more than associating the coincidence of a virology institute known to be researching similar viruses being in the neighbourhood of an early outbreak.
New viruses are regrettably common events. The likeliest explanation is that Covid 19 originated in the same way as all the others do. But that seems a feeble riposte. The theory will endure.
And after they had that mass gathering, to stop the deportation of two illegal immigrants:
According to the latest figures by Public Health Scotland, Glasgow's seven-day average case rate has increased to 133.3 cases per 100,000 population. This is based on people who were tested between May 14 and 20.
It comes amid concern about the new Indian covid variant, which is believed to be driving an outbreak in the south side.
The figure is not too far off the 150 cases per threshold for when a local authority in Scotland is likely to end up under level four lockdown restrictions as per the Scottish Government's latest strategic framework which was revised back in March this year.
The city could be plunged into the Level 4 lockdown threshold if cases continue to rise.
Where pretty much everyone of a 1000 or so people were wearing masks, followed by 10k plus people, none of whom were wearing masks, pishing and fighting and slobbering over each other for 12 hours. Which 'mass gathering' do you think resulted in most cases?
Both were bad ideas. Only one of them was criticised.
I've yet to hear a smidgeon of criticism from SCons about a drunken mob assaulting police, abusing ambulance crews, battering the feck out of each other, pishing in the street, vandalising council property, dropping tons of litter and smashed glass and bellowing out sectarian hate in George Sq. Twice.
I guess once you've gone BJ cultist you'll pretty much tolerate anything.
What's Boris got to do with what your Scottish compatriots are doing in Glasgow on a night out?
Fwiw (very little) BJ is the minister for the Union, and no matter how much you wish to avert your eyes and pretend these people don't exist, they identify as British and Unionist. I know BJ lied to and shat all over Ulster Unionists but he might have more difficulty doing that to the mainland variety.
A comprehensive free trade deal between the UK and Norway is at risk of collapsing as the Christian Democrat party fears such a pact would hit farmers in Scandinavia’s richest country too hard.
The pandering to the agriculture lobby there looks as crackers as it does over here. Both countries are rich and have a very small proportion of their workforce employed tending to livestock. Why not just open the door to cheap and plentiful food imports, and either pay upland farmers to act, effectively, as landscape wardens, or buy them out (at a price well in excess of the market value of their land) and plant it up with forest?
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Yeah and this is why we need to embrace the novelty act. We'll never come anywhere other than last with earnest sounding, seriously written songs and singers. Anyone who has any level of musical talent in the UK will go and get a record deal, one of my middle aged friends is in a band and they have a record deal and are planning a UK and European tour this autumn. They're a tiny band but really fun and very talented.
The other issue is that UK music is not compatible with Eurovision. Not enough trashy pop outside of the charts and no chart act like Ed Sheeran would do it.
This thread seemed pretty convincing to me- basically, Eurovision songs have moved on, and the UK keeps entering songs that would have won in the 80s/90s.
(This feels like the sort of thing that ought to be a very AI-able problem.)
That's probably a fair assessment. These terribly bland songs don't represent the UK music scene either which I think is a problem. The issue here is getting a serious artist to do it. Eurovision is seen as pretty cringe here which is why anyone with ambitions to become a chart topping artist won't touch it.
It's a bit chicken and egg I think, if serious artists did it then it would be seen as a good way to get lots of exposure but because none do they won't do it for fear of the 0 points.
We'd be better off getting some sob story X-factor person to do it or, as I think, a novelty act which doesn't try to win and doesn't take itself too seriously like the Iceland one.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Or indeed, a Eurovision entry by a top end band.
But if you're already successful, why would you pitch yourself against joke bands from Latvia in a competition?
There's simply no upside to take a massive amount of time out of your schedule to do something highly unlikely to further your career.
If we want to win Eurovision (and personally I couldn't give a shit), then the way you'd do it is to make X Factor (which did produce *many* successful acts) into the feeder.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
A comprehensive free trade deal between the UK and Norway is at risk of collapsing as the Christian Democrat party fears such a pact would hit farmers in Scandinavia’s richest country too hard.
The pandering to the agriculture lobby there looks as crackers as it does over here. Both countries are rich and have a very small proportion of their workforce employed tending to livestock. Why not just open the door to cheap and plentiful food imports, and either pay upland farmers to act, effectively, as landscape wardens, or buy them out (at a price well in excess of the market value of their land) and plant it up with forest?
It's completely mad. People have this overly romanticised view of agriculture while the reality is overpaid lobbyists from agribusiness whispering in politicians ears over expensive lunches.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
I think the Democrats now require a lead of 3 - 4% nationally to carry the Electoral College. That's not down to gerrymandering so much as clustering. The Democrats run up leads that are far too good for their own good in big cities.
If the Republicans were not in the habit of choosing loons, they'd have a hammer=lock on the Senate, given the overrepresentation of small States.
Largely but not always, in 2012 for example Obama won the Electoral College over Romney by a bigger margin than he beat Romney by in the popular vote
By the way, the article that @Leon quotes is a little bit disingenuous. It claims that as we've not found the exact carrier of CV19, then that makes it extremely unlikely it escaped from the wild.
Which is fine, except that (a) it's extremely similar to bat diseases and there are lots of bats out there, and (b) if you're going to use that as an argument, then you should probably also note that there a massive number of diseases from which we do not know the original animal host, such as AIDS and Ebola.
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Even X Factor leaves musicians a bit tainted, and that's seen as a rung above Eurovision. To be a Eurovision winner is probably not high on the list of aspirations for many UK musicians, it is not something perceived as having any credibility at all, it's on a par with being a novelty act.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Or indeed, a Eurovision entry by a top end band.
But if you're already successful, why would you pitch yourself against joke bands from Latvia in a competition?
There's simply no upside to take a massive amount of time out of your schedule to do something highly unlikely to further your career.
If we want to win Eurovision (and personally I couldn't give a shit), then the way you'd do it is to make X Factor (which did produce *many* successful acts) into the feeder.
Yeah I think that's probably the best shout, especially now that X-factor has lost its chart topping power. I'm sure Simon Cowell could be convinced as it changes up the formula a bit and to the rest of Europe it would finally seem like the UK is taking the competition seriously.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Yeah and this is why we need to embrace the novelty act. We'll never come anywhere other than last with earnest sounding, seriously written songs and singers. Anyone who has any level of musical talent in the UK will go and get a record deal, one of my middle aged friends is in a band and they have a record deal and are planning a UK and European tour this autumn. They're a tiny band but really fun and very talented.
The other issue is that UK music is not compatible with Eurovision. Not enough trashy pop outside of the charts and no chart act like Ed Sheeran would do it.
This thread seemed pretty convincing to me- basically, Eurovision songs have moved on, and the UK keeps entering songs that would have won in the 80s/90s.
(This feels like the sort of thing that ought to be a very AI-able problem.)
This could all easily be resolved by the BBC washing its hands of Eurovision and letting ITV have a go. They'd be vastly superior at organising a talent show to find a winner (something the Beeb no longer even bothers to do,) and if they provide a good range of acts for the public to vote for then sooner or later they'll probably pick one that does well, regardless of how eccentric it appears.
Middle of the road, forgettable pop songs performed by has-beens and never-wases just won't scour, and nor is there any need to worry about risking embarrassment. After nul points, an act that manages to get un point would still be a considerable improvement.
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
No. No upside and a risk of being accused of being racist.
It is often said that the Conservative party's raison d'etre is the pursuit of power. But whatever else you think of them, the pattern throughout history has manifested itself by having no fixed policy platform which they weren't prepare to ditch if they fell out of step with the electorate. And once adapting to these revised political platforms they have generally stuck to them. That's democracy.
In the US the Republican party also seek the pursuit of power. But unlike the UK Conservatives, their political platform, their approach to achieving it, particularly in recent has remain fixed. As demographic change has moved against them, they have not sought to adapt their platform, if anything they have doubled down on it (ironically Trump in many ways was an exception, but he in contrast was arguably one of the most corrupt individuals ever to get involved in the US body politic). And to the extent that they retain any political platform it is nihilism. Having pursued power they don't (and i accept this is a generality - there are obviously many exceptions - but it is enough ingrained and widespread as to be more than an aberration) have any ambition to do good with it. They seek power to enrich themselves and those like themselves, they rarely argue that their 'policies' such as they are will improve the lives of all.
People cite "extremism" in the Democratic party. They point to examples of gerrymandering in Democratic states (Maryland often cited). But in no way are these things overwhelming, or even close to majoritarian. I imagine most Democratic supporters view Maryland with distaste at best, some perhaps a necessary evil to combat what the GOP get up to (there are some who argue that the only way to beat them is to join them) - it is by no means the norm as it is in Red states.
America got lucky in 2016-20. Trump didn't really know what he was doing. He used the Presidency to try to enrich himself and his family, and gave the likes of Mitch McConnell almost free rein on his agenda to institutionalise a Republican view of the world in the judiciary, but he could have done much worse. For at least two years he tried to do things reasonably conventionally, and appointed largely sane people to run his Government. I also think he didn't realise what he might have been able to do until too late. Give him another chance and they won't be so lucky.
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Even X Factor leaves musicians a bit tainted, and that's seen as a rung above Eurovision. To be a Eurovision winner is probably not high on the list of aspirations for many UK musicians, it is not something perceived as having any credibility at all, it's on a par with being a novelty act.
But I think people who want to win X-factor would probably be ok with also doing Eurovision. I think it would allow ITV to switch BGT into the Xmas schedule as well and X-factor into the barren spring schedule.
The issue is that it would require ITV to want to do it given that Eurovision is a BBC show and will be on the BBC for the foreseeable future.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
This isn't correct, Rita Hart would be sitting in congress if the Democrats were willing to game the system to the same degree as the GOP
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
I think the Democrats now require a lead of 3 - 4% nationally to carry the Electoral College. That's not down to gerrymandering so much as clustering. The Democrats run up leads that are far too good for their own good in big cities.
If the Republicans were not in the habit of choosing loons, they'd have a hammer=lock on the Senate, given the overrepresentation of small States.
Biden won by 7 million votes. He won California by 6m votes. What the Democrats need is for liberal California to release some voters. Interestingly that is what is happening...
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Or indeed, a Eurovision entry by a top end band.
But if you're already successful, why would you pitch yourself against joke bands from Latvia in a competition?
There's simply no upside to take a massive amount of time out of your schedule to do something highly unlikely to further your career.
If we want to win Eurovision (and personally I couldn't give a shit), then the way you'd do it is to make X Factor (which did produce *many* successful acts) into the feeder.
True. But still.... think of what an entry from Iron Maiden would be like.....
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
I think the Democrats now require a lead of 3 - 4% nationally to carry the Electoral College. That's not down to gerrymandering so much as clustering. The Democrats run up leads that are far too good for their own good in big cities.
If the Republicans were not in the habit of choosing loons, they'd have a hammer=lock on the Senate, given the overrepresentation of small States.
The risk for the Republicans, though, is that Texas flips.
If you look at the South Western United States, New Mexico was reliably Republican until Clinton, and then went for W in 2004, and has since been increasingly and safely Democrat. Nevada and Colorado have followed similar trajectories.
And it looks like Arizona is that latest on the list to become a Blue State.
Partly due to urbanisation, partly due to demographic trends, Texas is following that same path. The Republican vote share was 64% under Reagan, and has been slowly slipping ever since. It was just 52% this time around.
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Even X Factor leaves musicians a bit tainted, and that's seen as a rung above Eurovision. To be a Eurovision winner is probably not high on the list of aspirations for many UK musicians, it is not something perceived as having any credibility at all, it's on a par with being a novelty act.
But I think people who want to win X-factor would probably be ok with also doing Eurovision. I think it would allow ITV to switch BGT into the Xmas schedule as well and X-factor into the barren spring schedule.
The issue is that it would require ITV to want to do it given that Eurovision is a BBC show and will be on the BBC for the foreseeable future.
Why not be more British? Why bland MOR? We have a wonderful modern folk tradition for example. The Unthanks spring to mind. Other countries use their native sounds.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Or indeed, a Eurovision entry by a top end band.
But if you're already successful, why would you pitch yourself against joke bands from Latvia in a competition?
There's simply no upside to take a massive amount of time out of your schedule to do something highly unlikely to further your career.
If we want to win Eurovision (and personally I couldn't give a shit), then the way you'd do it is to make X Factor (which did produce *many* successful acts) into the feeder.
True. But still.... think of what an entry from Iron Maiden would be like.....
Scotland's lord advocate and solicitor general resign
Scotland's top law officers have confirmed they are leaving their posts.
Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC and Solicitor General Alison Di Rollo QC have said they will continue in their roles until replacements are appointed.
The lord advocate is the head of Scotland's prosecution body and is the principal legal adviser to the Scottish government. The solicitor general is his deputy. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57221516
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Or indeed, a Eurovision entry by a top end band.
But if you're already successful, why would you pitch yourself against joke bands from Latvia in a competition?
There's simply no upside to take a massive amount of time out of your schedule to do something highly unlikely to further your career.
If we want to win Eurovision (and personally I couldn't give a shit), then the way you'd do it is to make X Factor (which did produce *many* successful acts) into the feeder.
True. But still.... think of what an entry from Iron Maiden would be like.....
Superannuated?
A staggeringly funny piss take would be my guess.....
What really strikes me about the poll is the shortage of people who actually put democracy first before their preferred political outcomes.
I think Brexit is terrible. I disapprove of the Tory government. But it would never cross my mind to deny their right to win majorities, and I've always thought most people on the centre-right agree - and in Britain, I think they do. But in the US, about a quarter of the electorate are willing to put up with anything to get their way.
Yeah, but the Left "does the same", in America
I don't think you grasp how intense the Woke agenda is, in the USA, and how it is being forced on a lot of unhappy people. The right think the Left is trying to destroy the country and remake it in a Woke style. A kind of cultural coup is underaway, and whites, Republicans and "patriots" are the target
If you believe there is a coup against your democracy, then democracy can go hang, for a while. First you need to fight and WIN
I'm not justifying this stance, of course, but I think this explains the poll above
FWIW we’ve just changed schools for our daughter because of the political agenda being imposed at ASL
Good for you @Charles - did you make your feelings known to ASL?
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
This isn't correct, Rita Hart would be sitting in congress if the Democrats were willing to game the system to the same degree as the GOP
The Democrats will obviously just adopt the same obstructionist tactics the GOP use if that is the only way to win power and it is naive to suggest otherwise.
Pelosi of course had already seated Hart before the House had decided on her petition to overturn a race her Republican opponent had already been certified to have won by 6 votes, Pelosi and the Dem leadership can be just as ruthless as the GOP if they need to.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
This isn't correct, Rita Hart would be sitting in congress if the Democrats were willing to game the system to the same degree as the GOP
To be fair this is a bad example. For Rita Hart to win it needed almost total unanimity in the Democratic conference. That was not going to happen. Equally i think the GOP wouldn't have had the numbers (this time) if the majorities in the House had been reversed (ignoring the Senate).
The danger really is the states. It's not just about voter suppression. Many of them are writing themselves the power to disregard election results. I'm not sure at the moment that the US constitution can stop them doing that. Under the constitution Senators (and possibly House representatives - i'm not sure) MUST be elected. The same is not true of the Presidency. If a state legislature gives itself the right to appoint the electors to the Electoral college then there's nothing the courts can do to prevent it.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
This isn't correct, Rita Hart would be sitting in congress if the Democrats were willing to game the system to the same degree as the GOP
The Democrats will obviously just adopt the same obstructionist tactics the GOP use if that is the only way to win power and it is naive to suggest otherwise.
Pelosi of course had already seated Hart before the House had decided on her petition to overturn a race her Republican opponent had already been certified to have won by 6 votes, Pelosi and the Dem leadership can be just as ruthless as the GOP if they need to.
This is incorrect. Hart had not been seated. Her opponent had been.
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
This isn't correct, Rita Hart would be sitting in congress if the Democrats were willing to game the system to the same degree as the GOP
The Democrats will obviously just adopt the same obstructionist tactics the GOP use if that is the only way to win power and it is naive to suggest otherwise.
Pelosi of course had already seated Hart before the House had decided on her petition to overturn a race her Republican opponent had already been certified to have won by 6 votes, Pelosi and the Dem leadership can be just as ruthless as the GOP if they need to.
This is incorrect. Hart had not been seated.
Pelosi was trying to overturn an already certified election
Andrew Sullivan has drawn comparisons with both the closing years of the Roman Republic, and Weimar Germany, and neither is hysterical. A healthy democracy is one where the losers accept that their opponents can win legitimately, and one where the winners accept that they might lose next time, and are prepared to accept defeat with good grace.
Both sides in the US simply want power at all costs, but the Republicans are the worst offenders of the two.
Attempting to "both sides" this is wank.
No, it's absolutely essential if you want to avoid the USA descending into civil war.
If the Democrats retake the House, a civil war is the only way the Democrats might be able to retake power. The Speaker of the House has a tonne of in extremis powers that we could well see used next time round.
There must, surely, be enough republican congressmen who wouldn’t have it. The whole party can’t be without honour.
The ones with any sort of honour (Romneys, Murkowskis, Collins) are rapidly heading out and don't tend to be in the House. I suppose the Dems do have Senate and VP. Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
In which case the next President would in effect be elected by Congress, not the Electoral College. However that would only be the case if both the House of Representatives and Senate were controlled by a different party to the party which had won the Presidential election as it requires both chambers of Congress to object to a state's electoral college votes being cast for the winner for the objection to be upheld.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
This isn't correct, Rita Hart would be sitting in congress if the Democrats were willing to game the system to the same degree as the GOP
The Democrats will obviously just adopt the same obstructionist tactics the GOP use if that is the only way to win power and it is naive to suggest otherwise.
Pelosi of course had already seated Hart before the House had decided on her petition to overturn a race her Republican opponent had already been certified to have won by 6 votes, Pelosi and the Dem leadership can be just as ruthless as the GOP if they need to.
This is incorrect. Hart had not been seated.
Nope, Pelosi seated Hart on a provisional basis on 3rd January despite the fact her GOP opponent had already been certified to have won the race
You are wrong.
I could find another source, but here's wiki:
Rita Hart (born May 5, 1956) is an American politician and retired educator who served as an Iowa State Senator from the 49th district from 2013 to 2019. She is a member of the Democratic Party. In the 2018 gubernatorial election, Hart ran for lieutenant governor of Iowa on the Democratic ticket, with running mate Fred Hubbell.
Hart was her party's nominee in the 2020 election for Iowa's 2nd congressional district. Hart's opponent, Republican physician Mariannette Miller-Meeks, was certified as the winner by six votes, one of the closest federal elections in history. Hart opted to bypass the Iowa state court system and contest the election via a petition with the House Administration Committee under the 1969 Federal Contested Elections Act, which sets forth procedures for contesting state election results directly through the House of Representatives. Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi provisionally seated Miller-Meeks on January 3, 2021, at the opening of the 117th Congress, pending the House's adjudication of Hart's petition to overturn the results of the race,[1] but on March 31, 2021, Hart withdrew her challenge.[
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Even X Factor leaves musicians a bit tainted, and that's seen as a rung above Eurovision. To be a Eurovision winner is probably not high on the list of aspirations for many UK musicians, it is not something perceived as having any credibility at all, it's on a par with being a novelty act.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
I'm confused: did JHB actually think our entry was decent?
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Yeah and this is why we need to embrace the novelty act. We'll never come anywhere other than last with earnest sounding, seriously written songs and singers. Anyone who has any level of musical talent in the UK will go and get a record deal, one of my middle aged friends is in a band and they have a record deal and are planning a UK and European tour this autumn. They're a tiny band but really fun and very talented.
The other issue is that UK music is not compatible with Eurovision. Not enough trashy pop outside of the charts and no chart act like Ed Sheeran would do it.
This thread seemed pretty convincing to me- basically, Eurovision songs have moved on, and the UK keeps entering songs that would have won in the 80s/90s.
Comments
Cancel culture does exist, and so it should. When did you last hear a Gary Glitter song on Radio 2
Rhiannon Spear is the SNP councilor in charge of education policy in Glasgow and was elected as SNP national women's convener in 2019.
Her "we hate the UK" tweet could be read as just a crap gag, but the more I think about it the more depressing it is
https://twitter.com/ChrisMusson/status/1396503736789372933?s=20
But is there not a hint of double standards about his actions? Less than two days before, he roundly applauded a crowd of at least 200 who surrounded a Home Office van to prevent two men being deported.
While the two events are obviously different, they are exactly the same in that the crowds blatantly breached the current laws on crowds gathering.
The Home Office van incident took place in one of the postcodes at the centre of the worrying rise in Covid cases that has seen Glasgow kept in Level 3.
It put police officers at risk of catching Covid as, despite the protestations of some, a baying mob surrounding a police van cannot possibly do it at a safe distance, any more than drunken hooligans in Rangers tops can in George Square.
But Mr Yousaf not only condoned people breaking the law but almost egged them on to do so. This from the man who was ultimately in charge of Police Scotland at the time.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19316976.alan-simpson-response-crowd-scenes-smacks-double-standards/
It's terrifying.
I suspect not.
But was heartened with London this week. People getting back to normal. Not a single place I visited mentioned the check in app. Cabbies happily said 'you don't need to wear that mask mate'. I heard of lock ins and house parties too. So good to see people ahead of government on this.
I guess once you've gone BJ cultist you'll pretty much tolerate anything.
From 2-1 to 2-4
Genuine question....
1) Damnatio memoriae ?
2) Because he gets paid per song play? (the reason I'd go for)
3) ??
Other than the results, it was very good after a very bizarre season in the final game of the season to hear authentic cheers of You'll Never Walk Alone.
Football isn't football without the fans. Hopefully when the new season starts in August it will be with 100% capacity crowds in the stadia and we never need to have empty ones again.
I'm growing increasingly optimistic that Covid is, in essence, done. We may get a bit more of it come the Winter, but no more tsunami waves. The vaccines haven't quite accomplished their task - we need to get through the youngsters first - but the emergency is finished. Social distancing should be consigned to the dustbin of history on June 21st.
Getting the deaf able to communicate is too woke for some.
(Kidding)
Here's the thing. If you are a genuinely talented musician in the UK, do you think "Eurovision Song Contest!".
Or do you think, "write songs, practise, play pubs, upload demo mixes to Souncloud, and try, try to get a record label intreseted"?
The Eurovision song contest is not a route to musical "stardom" for would be British pop stars. If you wanted it to be, then you'd work to make The X Factor into the feeding mechanism. Make it something which produces successful pop acts.
As opposed to... Well... Can anyone think of a single UK Eurovision entry (since Bucks Fizz) that went on to be a successful act?
Next time the GOP do take control of both chambers it will be very difficult for the Dems to win the presidency regardless of the true Electoral college result; the State legislatures in the battleground states are currently gerrymandered GOP
The question stands. I have always been puzzled by the idea that an artists behaviour effects the value of their work and visa versa.
As in Ezra Pound, Caravaggio etc
Edit - in all seriousness, the fact that his music isn’t exactly brilliant means that given his disgrace there’s no reason to keep playing it. Sometimes for genuinely brilliant art people can make that kind of separation. But for Glitter? Nah.
https://twitter.com/BristOliver/status/1396184812885581825?s=20
The next UK national anthem should be composed by System of A Down.
If the Republicans were not in the habit of choosing loons, they'd have a hammer=lock on the Senate, given the overrepresentation of small States.
A Nat, talking about a "Cult"?
Seriously?
We've won it 5 times, finished second a record 15 times and have the record for the longest-running string of Top 5 placings. Also, we were 3rd in 2002 and 5th in 2009. Our record has only been markedly poor since 2012 - but even then we were mid table in 2017.
I think it's because we simply expect to be in the top 5 every year because of our strong music scene but also think the whole thing is a bit of a joke.
Probably seems arrogant to everyone else.
The other issue is that UK music is not compatible with Eurovision. Not enough trashy pop outside of the charts and no chart act like Ed Sheeran would do it.
yes, null points again was BoZo's fault...
Off topic, Everton are crap again. Second on Boxing Day, finished tenth below Leeds.
Not, I hasten to add the idea that this is a "manufactured" virus or that the Chinese somehow leaked it deliberately. But the idea that the security conditions at the lab were not what they should have been, and either an employee got bitten by a bat and covered it up, or a vial got broken and then wasn't cleaned up as it should have been.
Those are quite plausible scenarios given:
(a) Wuhan was the biggest outbreak, and the centre of (bat) coronavirus studies is in the city
and
(b) The Wuhan strain does not appear to be the oldest in circulation
What we *do* know for certain is that (a) this originated in China, and (b) the Chinese have lied and obfuscated.
Now, this doesn't mean it certainly leaked from the lab. It's perfectly possible that someone flew on a plane to Wuhan with it, and infected 40 people on the flight, and that's why it spread as it did from there. But - on the balance of probabilities - given where the lab is located, it seems more likely it escaped from there.
https://twitter.com/kitlovelace/status/1396160993504415744?s=20
(This feels like the sort of thing that ought to be a very AI-able problem.)
https://www.cityam.com/brexit-uk-norway-trade-deal-may-collapse-as-christian-democrats-block-pact-to-protect-farmers-from-british-beef-and-cheese/
(As a leading indicator look for schools appointing a director of Diversity, Equity & Inclusion. Or as the muppets at ASL called it without thinking of the acronym “director of Diversity of Institutional Equity”)
1. Specificity
2. Plausibility
3. Undeniability
4. No real evidence for the theory in preference to other more usual explanations
The Lab Leak theory meets all four criteria. The assertion is highly specific, not only identifying the institute but suggesting a particular employee of it being responsible. A lab accidentally releasing a virus into the wild is very plausible, more so than associates of Prince Charles murdering Diana. The data isn't there to definitively prove a specific alternative explanation. From what I have seen at least, the Lab Leak is nothing more than associating the coincidence of a virology institute known to be researching similar viruses being in the neighbourhood of an early outbreak.
New viruses are regrettably common events. The likeliest explanation is that Covid 19 originated in the same way as all the others do. But that seems a feeble riposte. The theory will endure.
It's a bit chicken and egg I think, if serious artists did it then it would be seen as a good way to get lots of exposure but because none do they won't do it for fear of the 0 points.
We'd be better off getting some sob story X-factor person to do it or, as I think, a novelty act which doesn't try to win and doesn't take itself too seriously like the Iceland one.
There's simply no upside to take a massive amount of time out of your schedule to do something highly unlikely to further your career.
If we want to win Eurovision (and personally I couldn't give a shit), then the way you'd do it is to make X Factor (which did produce *many* successful acts) into the feeder.
The Democrats would then equally object to the confirmation of victory of a Republican Presidential candidate who won the Electoral College if they won control of both chambers of Congress
Which is fine, except that (a) it's extremely similar to bat diseases and there are lots of bats out there, and (b) if you're going to use that as an argument, then you should probably also note that there a massive number of diseases from which we do not know the original animal host, such as AIDS and Ebola.
Middle of the road, forgettable pop songs performed by has-beens and never-wases just won't scour, and nor is there any need to worry about risking embarrassment. After nul points, an act that manages to get un point would still be a considerable improvement.
In the US the Republican party also seek the pursuit of power. But unlike the UK Conservatives, their political platform, their approach to achieving it, particularly in recent has remain fixed. As demographic change has moved against them, they have not sought to adapt their platform, if anything they have doubled down on it (ironically Trump in many ways was an exception, but he in contrast was arguably one of the most corrupt individuals ever to get involved in the US body politic). And to the extent that they retain any political platform it is nihilism. Having pursued power they don't (and i accept this is a generality - there are obviously many exceptions - but it is enough ingrained and widespread as to be more than an aberration) have any ambition to do good with it. They seek power to enrich themselves and those like themselves, they rarely argue that their 'policies' such as they are will improve the lives of all.
People cite "extremism" in the Democratic party. They point to examples of gerrymandering in Democratic states (Maryland often cited). But in no way are these things overwhelming, or even close to majoritarian. I imagine most Democratic supporters view Maryland with distaste at best, some perhaps a necessary evil to combat what the GOP get up to (there are some who argue that the only way to beat them is to join them) - it is by no means the norm as it is in Red states.
America got lucky in 2016-20. Trump didn't really know what he was doing. He used the Presidency to try to enrich himself and his family, and gave the likes of Mitch McConnell almost free rein on his agenda to institutionalise a Republican view of the world in the judiciary, but he could have done much worse. For at least two years he tried to do things reasonably conventionally, and appointed largely sane people to run his Government. I also think he didn't realise what he might have been able to do until too late. Give him another chance and they won't be so lucky.
My impression anyway.
The issue is that it would require ITV to want to do it given that Eurovision is a BBC show and will be on the BBC for the foreseeable future.
https://twitter.com/JakeWSimons/status/1396424554784899072
If you look at the South Western United States, New Mexico was reliably Republican until Clinton, and then went for W in 2004, and has since been increasingly and safely Democrat. Nevada and Colorado have followed similar trajectories.
And it looks like Arizona is that latest on the list to become a Blue State.
Partly due to urbanisation, partly due to demographic trends, Texas is following that same path. The Republican vote share was 64% under Reagan, and has been slowly slipping ever since. It was just 52% this time around.
We have a wonderful modern folk tradition for example.
The Unthanks spring to mind. Other countries use their native sounds.
Scotland's top law officers have confirmed they are leaving their posts.
Lord Advocate James Wolffe QC and Solicitor General Alison Di Rollo QC have said they will continue in their roles until replacements are appointed.
The lord advocate is the head of Scotland's prosecution body and is the principal legal adviser to the Scottish government. The solicitor general is his deputy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-57221516
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bbc-journalist-hitler-was-right-
“Correction: this apparently was filmed in Russia“
Pelosi of course had already seated Hart before the House had decided on her petition to overturn a race her Republican opponent had already been certified to have won by 6 votes, Pelosi and the Dem leadership can be just as ruthless as the GOP if they need to.
The danger really is the states. It's not just about voter suppression. Many of them are writing themselves the power to disregard election results. I'm not sure at the moment that the US constitution can stop them doing that. Under the constitution Senators (and possibly House representatives - i'm not sure) MUST be elected. The same is not true of the Presidency. If a state legislature gives itself the right to appoint the electors to the Electoral college then there's nothing the courts can do to prevent it.
I could find another source, but here's wiki:
Rita Hart (born May 5, 1956) is an American politician and retired educator who served as an Iowa State Senator from the 49th district from 2013 to 2019. She is a member of the Democratic Party. In the 2018 gubernatorial election, Hart ran for lieutenant governor of Iowa on the Democratic ticket, with running mate Fred Hubbell.
Hart was her party's nominee in the 2020 election for Iowa's 2nd congressional district. Hart's opponent, Republican physician Mariannette Miller-Meeks, was certified as the winner by six votes, one of the closest federal elections in history. Hart opted to bypass the Iowa state court system and contest the election via a petition with the House Administration Committee under the 1969 Federal Contested Elections Act, which sets forth procedures for contesting state election results directly through the House of Representatives. Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi provisionally seated Miller-Meeks on January 3, 2021, at the opening of the 117th Congress, pending the House's adjudication of Hart's petition to overturn the results of the race,[1] but on March 31, 2021, Hart withdrew her challenge.[