politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » At a 70%+ chance the betting markets are surely over-rating Tr
Comments
-
It can happen. The Senate could vote on the conviction (which would remove from office), and the disqualification separately - though I doubt they would in this case.TheScreamingEagles said:
Can’t happen.david_herdson said:
Oh, that is brilliant. You're absolutely right: there's nothing in the constitution preventing a president driven from office from running again, or from winning and resuming the position.edmundintokyo said:
PS Don't forget to consider the weirdly-possible edge case of "he gets impeached or 25th-amendment-ed and driven out of office, but still wins the 2020 GOP nomination".
‘Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.’
ARTICLE I, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 7
https://www.heritage.org/constitution/articles/1/essays/18/punishment-for-impeachment0 -
The one thing many on this side of the pond forget is, to our minds, the insane loyalty to the flag, the constitution (even though many haven't read it), the Presidency and the USA itself, that the Americans have. If a President was to abuse their position to such an extent, then many Republicans would feel obliged to stand aside to let the Democrats win, to save the reputation of the government and the position of the President. If the Democrat President turned out to be of a similar disposition, then a consensus would form to change the Constitution.HYUFD said:
In which case the Trump base would tefuse to turn out in 2020 or go third party thus handing the election to Sanders or Warren.david_herdson said:
Oh, that is brilliant. You're absolutely right: there's nothing in the constitution preventing a president driven from office from running again, or from winning and resuming the position.edmundintokyo said:
PS Don't forget to consider the weirdly-possible edge case of "he gets impeached or 25th-amendment-ed and driven out of office, but still wins the 2020 GOP nomination".
Correction Yes, there is something in the constitution that could prevent it but it isn't necessarily invoked upon a convicted impeachment and requires a second vote.
That said, I think if the GOP were willing to go as far as to convict Trump, they'd make damn sure he couldn't run again.
The Tories have the same problem if hard Brexiteers stay at home or vote UKIP thus handing the next general election to Corbyn
0 -
The advert ban is OTT for me.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jezziah, interested in your take on the banning of the 'beach body ready' bikini ad on the Tube. Would you see that as 'protecting women'?
On minorities, I think Labour needs to get its house in order there regarding anti-semitism. There's also the dread fear (driven by political correctness, of which SJWs are the vanguard) of racism accusations which led to Rotherham-type situations going on for so long and causing so much harm.
There is the dread of racism accusations regarding calling out Israel as well, lead in part by our media. We may have different takes on the various things involved but if the definition of an SJW in your mind is those who bully and censor people using their hyper politically correct world view then using my takes the media, and to be specific many parts of the right are SJW's also.
Or to put it simply the SJWs stop people talking out about crimes because of fear of being labelled racist, whether those crimes are taking place in Palestine or Rotherham.
Although both sides would argue differently. I don't have a problem with criticism of Muslim paedophiles anymore than I do non Muslim paedophiles. I imagine you don't have a problem with criticism of Israel anymore than criticism of any other country.
The complaints are made because the suspicion is it is either a cover for something else or just an excuse. Which obviously is true in some cases, there are Islamophobes who go on about 'Muslim' crimes and Anti semites who go on about 'Jewish' crimes using things that are valid to complain about as cover.0 -
It would have been a very different campaign, and it's plausible there might have been a third candidate like Bloomberg getting involved.MikeSmithson said:
There's massive doubt that Bernie would have done better. His age, his politics and the fact that he's not a Democrat.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it.
Apologies on the apostrophes, not sure what I'm doing with them usually.
But I now think the right candidate, with the right back story etc. can run and win on a left-wing platform, whereas I never thought that was possible in America before.0 -
Trump needs more than the support of his base. All his "make america great again" and self-declarations about being tough and able to strike deal look hollow in the light of yesterday.
How do we know he wants to run a second time? There's a lot of speculation that he might not. He is getting older and there a increasing doubts about his health.
We also do not know about where the Russian links probe is going to end up.
There are enough doubt elements to undermine the 70% certainty of him getting the nomination.0 -
I have to agree with Mike and David; Sanders would not have been a great candidate in the general as opposed to the primary election.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it...
While it is very likely that the Democrats will select a less centrist candidate this time around, there is a large amount of political space between Clinton and Sanders.
Someone who can appeal (or at least not disgust) both wings of the party will likely get the nomination - though I recognise the Democratic vote in primaries and the the actual Presidential race are very different things, and this is far from a certainty.0 -
There is no equivalence between Trump and Nazism. Trump is an American nationalist. I accept that there are some elements of his agenda that could be described as fascist, which are concerning.TheJezziah said:
I made no predictions for the race... I was replying to your struggle with which is worse the SJW's or the others (and using the same system Nazi would seem to be the label)nielh said:
Its going to be WH2016 all over again. The left will keep making the same errors.TheJezziah said:
Nazi's on the one side... people who care about social justice on the other...nielh said:
This is also another problem. The democrats are infested with SJW tyrants. Which tyranny do you prefer?IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:.
To my mind, the betting opportunity is in backing a 2nd Trump term.
Yeah that's a tough one right there....
The worst SJW is probably about 1/10 as bad as the best Nazi.The Nazi's will support and could easily lead to genocide, the SJW will yap on about some person not using the correct identification for a transexual Jewish black woman.
Although the Morris Dancer definition seems a bit wider and would include newspapers that go after individuals judging by his description.....
As for the American left I think they will work incredibly hard to get their candidate in the presidential race this time, after last time when the centrist candidate lost anyway I think they have a chance. If they fail again then we could well see a rerun of 2016.
On the other hand, I personally consider the SJW left, in general terms, as a greater threat to liberty, individual freedom and democracy. The way they have hounded law abiding people out of public life on numerous occasions (the UCL scientist mentioned earlier being a prime example) is telling. Whereas Trump sees the rule of law and freedom of speech as a bit of an annoyance, these people actively work to undermine it, using mob rule.
To my mind, the left is far more fanatical and blinkered in pursuit of its political objectives than the right, even if morally the left might have the high ground. So, even if I agree with most of the things that the left are trying to achieve, I am repulsed by their methods.
In a lot of ways we are confronted again with a choice between fascism and communism.0 -
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.0 -
To be fair they did talk before invoking Article 50 inasmuch as they said we either stay in the single market with the four freedoms, or have a simple FTA. The problem was we didn't believe it.MarqueeMark said:
No. It. Would. Not.Benpointer said:The EU would not have wanted its 'ever-closer union' project put on indefinite ice by the UK's pending A50; it would have talked eventually.
0 -
You speak as though 'hard Brexiteers' are a larger minority than 'soft Brexiteers'. I suspect that Remainers plus soft Brexiteers would form a majority that the Tories could win, if they tried!HYUFD said:
In which case the Trump base would tefuse to turn out in 2020 or go third party thus handing the election to Sanders or Warren.david_herdson said:
Oh, that is brilliant. You're absolutely right: there's nothing in the constitution preventing a president driven from office from running again, or from winning and resuming the position.edmundintokyo said:
PS Don't forget to consider the weirdly-possible edge case of "he gets impeached or 25th-amendment-ed and driven out of office, but still wins the 2020 GOP nomination".
Correction Yes, there is something in the constitution that could prevent it but it isn't necessarily invoked upon a convicted impeachment and requires a second vote.
That said, I think if the GOP were willing to go as far as to convict Trump, they'd make damn sure he couldn't run again.
The Tories have the same problem if hard Brexiteers stay at home or vote UKIP thus handing the next general election to Corbyn0 -
Remember the golden rule - Trump agrees with whoever he spoke to last. He didn't say anything that can't be obfuscated by subsequent remarks so when he's back in the states that's precisely what he'll do.
1.42 is probably a smidgen long I think.
NO BET for me at these prices.0 -
It's a view; an alternative is that much of that is in the current price. A move from 70% to (say) 60% doesn't excite me as a trading bet.MikeSmithson said:Trump needs more than the support of his base. All his "make america great again" and self-declarations about being tough and able to strike deal look hollow in the light of yesterday.
How do we know he wants to run a second time? There's a lot of speculation that he might not. He is getting older and there a increasing doubts about his health.
We also do not know about where the Russian links probe is going to end up.
There are enough doubt elements to undermine the 70% certainty of him getting the nomination.
The single biggest threat to his renomination is the Mueller investigation, IMO.
(edit, I see that Betfair just matched a trade at 1.53, so you got on this in good time, but it's a pretty wide spread quoted now - 1.43/1.53)0 -
Bernie doesn't come across as much older than Hillary in terms of health and energy... When you consider the video she had looking ill and her health problems that were mentioned this is one area where Sanders may have an advantage (if we take health, age and energy all as one thing)MikeSmithson said:
There's massive doubt that Bernie would have done better. His age, his politics and the fact that he's not a Democrat.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it.
Apologies on the apostrophes, not sure what I'm doing with them usually.
His politics, much like Trumps actually inspired some enthusiasm, well that and like Trump the fact he wasn't a democrat (like Trump wasn't a Republican) is another advantage.
It has been the years of the outsiders with the establishment candidates underperforming. Sanders not being an established candidate is quite likely a good thing
Admittedly all a hypothetical but I can see Sanders doing it and I think that is a view spread pretty deeply in the Democrat party.0 -
I think that's a fair comment.TheJezziah said:
The advert ban is OTT for me.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jezziah, interested in your take on the banning of the 'beach body ready' bikini ad on the Tube. Would you see that as 'protecting women'?
On minorities, I think Labour needs to get its house in order there regarding anti-semitism. There's also the dread fear (driven by political correctness, of which SJWs are the vanguard) of racism accusations which led to Rotherham-type situations going on for so long and causing so much harm.
There is the dread of racism accusations regarding calling out Israel as well, lead in part by our media. We may have different takes on the various things involved but if the definition of an SJW in your mind is those who bully and censor people using their hyper politically correct world view then using my takes the media, and to be specific many parts of the right are SJW's also.
Or to put it simply the SJWs stop people talking out about crimes because of fear of being labelled racist, whether those crimes are taking place in Palestine or Rotherham.
Although both sides would argue differently. I don't have a problem with criticism of Muslim paedophiles anymore than I do non Muslim paedophiles. I imagine you don't have a problem with criticism of Israel anymore than criticism of any other country.
The complaints are made because the suspicion is it is either a cover for something else or just an excuse. Which obviously is true in some cases, there are Islamophobes who go on about 'Muslim' crimes and Anti semites who go on about 'Jewish' crimes using things that are valid to complain about as cover.
I actually have some sympathy with Labour over the definition of anti-semitism. I never thought that the McPherson definition of a racist incident was a good one, and it should not be the case that an argument is deemed anti-Semitic because the complainant says it is.0 -
It's a decent article, but it's worth considering what Trump has actually done of substance for those communities, beyond appealing to their prejudices.Sandpit said:
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.0 -
Also if Bernie had been the nominee then the pro-Trump Russian machine would have been using every means to undermine him as well. It wasn't just Hillary - Putin wanted his man in the White House.david_herdson said:
Indeed. Trump would have labelled him Commie Bernie, or some such, which would have been a hard sell to middle America.MikeSmithson said:
There's massive doubt that Bernie would have done better. His age, his politics and the fact that he's not a Democrat.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it.
Apologies on the apostrophes, not sure what I'm doing with them usually.
Bernie was great as an insurgent candidate against Hillary, who didn't attract much negative campaigning from Hillary (because she didn't want to make it look like she was worried about losing), or from anyone else; nor much scrutiny from the media, who were far more interested in Trump - who was actually winning - than in an unusually successful fringe candidate.
Were Bernie to emerge as a genuine front-runner, the spotlight would be much harsher. And that's before the age issue and his lack of roots in the Democrats.0 -
Labour does not have the moral authority given its recent history to concoct its own definition of anti-Semitism, no matter how objectively superior it might be to the internationally recognised standard definition. I would have thought even the most one-eyed Corbynite could recognise that.0
-
Trump's age, politics and the fact he wasn't a Republican didn't seem to matter much.MikeSmithson said:
There's massive doubt that Bernie would have done better. His age, his politics and the fact that he's not a Democrat.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it.
Apologies on the apostrophes, not sure what I'm doing with them usually.0 -
For those about to get over-excited by the Electoral Commission fine:
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/10191222753695866930 -
They did.Freggles said:
The Cabinet could have decided what they actually wanted first..Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pointer/Mr. Topping, the EU was refusing to discuss anything until Article 50 was invoked. They wouldn't have given a nod to anything suggested.
That's not to say that May hasn't cocked this up, of course, just that EU intransigence is not a small factor in things turning out the way they have.
They decided they wanted to regain control of our laws, borders, exit the ECJ, exit European agencies while still having as free a trade deal as possible and no hard border in Northern Ireland.
The EU refused to discuss that until A50 was issued so after that decision was made they issued A50 - and the EU promptly said no that's trying to have your cake and eat it too and we won't even discuss trade until you sort out Northern Ireland.
The problem was not our cabinet reaching a position beforehand (they had). The problem was our cabinet had no Plan B for what to do when the EU said no that that position.0 -
It's a terrible article that's poorly written and riven with the casual prejudice of lowered expectations.Sandpit said:
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.
The title is also a lie because those reasons have been discussed on many platforms.0 -
Indeed and we can thank a certain Mrs Miller for that clarity.CarlottaVance said:For those about to get over-excited by the Electoral Commission fine:
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/10191222753695866930 -
I see Putin is back to trolling us on the chemical attack:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/17/putin-accuses-uk-of-ungrounded-accusations-over-novichok
Putin suggested the case could be driven by domestic issues in Britain, saying: “Nobody wants to look into these.”...0 -
Still some pockets left of the Wunderwaffe mentality.
https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/10189802109838213170 -
If you're asking for something that has no precedent anywhere in the world, and can't logically exist under the existing institutional frameworks, then continuing to ask for it while trying to raise the stakes naturally leads people to question your good faith.Philip_Thompson said:They did.
They decided they wanted to regain control of our laws, borders, exit the ECJ, exit European agencies while still having as free a trade deal as possible and no hard border in Northern Ireland.
The EU refused to discuss that until A50 was issued so after that decision was made they issued A50 - and the EU promptly said no that's trying to have your cake and eat it too and we won't even discuss trade until you sort out Northern Ireland.
The problem was not our cabinet reaching a position beforehand (they had). The problem was our cabinet had no Plan B for what to do when the EU said no that that position.0 -
Elon had a bad day on twitter on sunday,
France rioted monday
Not looking great for Vince & Tim Farron on tuesday0 -
-
"to give lecture on gay sex"Pulpstar said:
I would have thought him singularly unqualified, BWDIK...0 -
Okay, so how’s about that famous hardcore Republican Nazi Michael Moore, making much the same points a fortnight before the 2016 election?Dura_Ace said:
It's a terrible article that's poorly written and riven with the casual prejudice of lowered expectations.Sandpit said:
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.
The title is also a lie because those reasons have been discussed on many platforms.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YYZqnc-zY5o0 -
Indeed we can thank her, as the result cannot be voided by the news today exactly because it was an advisory referendum only - if Brexit was a legally binding result, it would be voidable. The fact it isn't voidable means it isn't a legally binding referendum. Brexit thickies can't have it both waysPhilip_Thompson said:
Indeed and we can thank a certain Mrs Miller for that clarity.CarlottaVance said:For those about to get over-excited by the Electoral Commission fine:
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/10191222753695866930 -
Conversely I live on a small estate whose official council-designated name is an effing grammatical error (St Georges Wood, sans apostrophe). It embarrasses me every time I fill out a form.Alistair said:
Autocorrect.ydoethur said:
I'm identifying as a Nazi right now - of the grammar sort. Will people please remember that plurals don't need fecking apostrophes? Second person this morning to make that mistake!Alistair said:That people even think there is equivalence between actual literal self identifying Nazi's and SJWs is pathetic.
0 -
I was using SJWs as the nitters of the democrats and Nazis as the nuters of the Republicans rather than implying that Trump and all his supporters are Nazis. I was referring to the ones who sieg heil and often own nazi or similar flags.nielh said:
There is no equivalence between Trump and Nazism. Trump is an American nationalist. I accept that there are some elements of his agenda that could be described as fascist, which are concerning.TheJezziah said:
.nielh said:
.TheJezziah said:nielh said:
This is also another problem. The democrats are infested with SJW tyrants. Which tyranny do you prefer?IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:.
To my mind, the betting opportunity is in backing a 2nd Trump term.
On the other hand, I personally consider the SJW left, in general terms, as a greater threat to liberty, individual freedom and democracy. The way they have hounded law abiding people out of public life on numerous occasions (the UCL scientist mentioned earlier being a prime example) is telling. Whereas Trump sees the rule of law and freedom of speech as a bit of an annoyance, these people actively work to undermine it, using mob rule.
To my mind, the left is far more fanatical and blinkered in pursuit of its political objectives than the right, even if morally the left might have the high ground. So, even if I agree with most of the things that the left are trying to achieve, I am repulsed by their methods.
In a lot of ways we are confronted again with a choice between fascism and communism.
I guess the rest of your post is where we rapidly depart, if we were to put America on a (very ridiculous) Anti PC to SJW scale (and assume both as bad) then it needs to go more SJW. I am sure there are plenty of OTT individual incidents that can be picked out but American Police need to move a hell of a lot a pc or SJW direction,. the president and the media need to move in a hell of an SJW direction as well
Also to the Bernie argument about calling him a commie, didn't they call Obama a commie or a socialist?
Among other much worse names it didn't do him much harm as he, like Bernie and unfortunately Trump inspired people and he was an outsider as well!
0 -
My aunt who lives in Sutton Coldfield still refuses after more than 40 years to use a Birmingham postcode. Can you not take guerilla action and subversively insert an apostrophe?NickPalmer said:
Conversely I live on a small estate whose official council-designated name is an effing grammatical error (St Georges Wood, sans apostrophe). It embarrasses me every time I fill out a form.Alistair said:
Autocorrect.ydoethur said:
I'm identifying as a Nazi right now - of the grammar sort. Will people please remember that plurals don't need fecking apostrophes? Second person this morning to make that mistake!Alistair said:That people even think there is equivalence between actual literal self identifying Nazi's and SJWs is pathetic.
0 -
This is why the Democrats should have gone Bernie, only he could claim to stand up for them like Trump did.Sandpit said:
Okay, so how’s about that famous hardcore Republican Nazi Michael Moore, making much the same points a fortnight before the 2016 election?Dura_Ace said:
It's a terrible article that's poorly written and riven with the casual prejudice of lowered expectations.Sandpit said:
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.
The title is also a lie because those reasons have been discussed on many platforms.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YYZqnc-zY5o
0 -
We've all argued about them. Apostrophes. Are you obsessive about possessives? Do you want to deploy your red marker pen every time you see Kings Cross? We thought it was high time for a definitive list of when to use an apostrophe in London place names.......NickPalmer said:
Conversely I live on a small estate whose official council-designated name is an effing grammatical error (St Georges Wood, sans apostrophe). It embarrasses me every time I fill out a form.Alistair said:
Autocorrect.ydoethur said:
I'm identifying as a Nazi right now - of the grammar sort. Will people please remember that plurals don't need fecking apostrophes? Second person this morning to make that mistake!Alistair said:That people even think there is equivalence between actual literal self identifying Nazi's and SJWs is pathetic.
In conclusion
It looks like there's no rhyme or reason to apostrophe use. Those looking for a comforting rule will not find one. The presence of a tube or train station can help crystallise a particular convention, but even then apostrophes come and go over the decades with the whims of fashion. We could stipulate that anywhere named after a landowner should include the possessive apostrophe, but few place names actually behave like that (see Crews Hill and entries therein).
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter.
https://londonist.com/2015/07/itsnotpossibletogetanapostropheinaurl0 -
Vince Cable and Tim Farron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
It's not going down well amongst the Lib Dems as you might imagine.volcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Frron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
I think Republicans will conclude that Trump is their best chance to hold onto the Presidency in 2020 which brings with it the likelihood of further tax cuts and favourable judicial appointments. The chances of a bipartisan move on impeachment are still very slim.
In UK news, I was aware that employment was high, and female employment has gone up massively in recent decades, but I had no idea that male employment was so far below 1970s levels. What is that all about?0 -
They were paired.Pulpstar said:
It's not going down well amongst the Lib Dems as you might imagine.volcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Frron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
It is a bit of a leep to blame them for a hard Brexit when 3 labour mps voted with the governmentvolcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Farron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
Who with ?Fenman said:
They were paired.Pulpstar said:
It's not going down well amongst the Lib Dems as you might imagine.volcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Frron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
With each other ?Fenman said:
They were paired.Pulpstar said:
It's not going down well amongst the Lib Dems as you might imagine.volcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Frron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
Probably a higher proportion of men look after children than in the 1970's.OblitusSumMe said:I think Republicans will conclude that Trump is their best chance to hold onto the Presidency in 2020 which brings with it the likelihood of further tax cuts and favourable judicial appointments. The chances of a bipartisan move on impeachment are still very slim.
In UK news, I was aware that employment was high, and female employment has gone up massively in recent decades, but I had no idea that male employment was so far below 1970s levels. What is that all about?0 -
What is Vince doing anyway.Pulpstar said:Elon had a bad day on twitter on sunday,
France rioted monday
Not looking great for Vince & Tim Farron on tuesday
It's time for him to hand over to Jo Swinson, then when the Tories kick out their second female leader in favour of a right wing older man, she can have a USP.
Also, optics side, because he's doing a poor job0 -
The dynamic of the race would have been very different with Bernie as the Dem candidate, certainly the disaffected swing states repulsed by Hillary might have gone the other way.TheJezziah said:
This is why the Democrats should have gone Bernie, only he could claim to stand up for them like Trump did.Sandpit said:
Okay, so how’s about that famous hardcore Republican Nazi Michael Moore, making much the same points a fortnight before the 2016 election?Dura_Ace said:
It's a terrible article that's poorly written and riven with the casual prejudice of lowered expectations.Sandpit said:
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.
The title is also a lie because those reasons have been discussed on many platforms.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YYZqnc-zY5o
I still think Trump is going to get re-elected as long as his health holds up, the liberal city-dwellers and media going bonkers over Trump really don’t understand small town America. It would be absolutely hillarious to watch them all completely lose their minds at his re-election.
The Dems need to choose their candidate carefully, but from what we’ve seen so far they are as likely to pick someone who’ll rack up millions of votes in CA and NY talking about transgender bathrooms - while Trump is talking to WI and MI about bringing more jobs home.0 -
Indeed - although remainers are savaging him. Cable has been a dismal failure. A next generation leader could've rebranded the Lib Dems as the desired centre/centre-left party people needed to vote for to neuter the extremists in the Tory and Labour Party. They'd only need 10 to 15 more seats (most of which would come from the Tories) to form a grouping that would have real power.Pulpstar said:
It's not going down well amongst the Lib Dems as you might imagine.volcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Frron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo
As it is, Vince is the worst of all worlds. Tainted by tuition fees, unenergetic, old and out of touch with younger voters. Oh dear.0 -
Layla Moran.Freggles said:What is Vince doing anyway.
It's time for him to hand over toJo Swinson
Absolute schoolboy error by Cable and Farron last night. Reading around various forums this morning it appears to have lost Cable a lot of goodwill.0 -
0
-
Goodness knows what his Powerpoint slides contained.Pulpstar said:0 -
A good article by (I know) Melanie Phillips in today's Times on the Tommy Robinson affair - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/it-is-absurd-to-claim-british-justice-is-fascist-as-supporters-of-far-right-activist-tommy-robinson-have-done-vjvmhx5fm
Not all that surprising really given that she's married to the legal commentator, Joshua Rosenberg.0 -
It's always slightly jarring when something happens that reminds you Vince Cable and the Lib Dems still exist.
I do wonder if complete and total invisibility and political irrelevance is part of a strategy, or the party is simply evaporating.0 -
The latter. They have the wrong leader. I quite liked Farron but the Lib Dems showed themselves to be rather illiberal in the way they treated him.grabcocque said:It's always slightly jarring when something happens that reminds you Vince Cable and the Lib Dems still exist.
I do wonder if complete and total invisibility and political irrelevance is part of a strategy, or the party is simply evaporating.
They have lost their confidence and mojo and Cable is not the man to revive it.
Incidentally, if Corbyn becomes PM while Trump is President we will be faced with the spectacle of two leaders who dismiss the views and expertise of their intelligence agencies and who may well be both mistrusted and (possibly) investigated by those same agencies.
Truly, we are blessed to live in interesting times.0 -
I have no liking for either Cable or Farron but in the interest of fairness were they paired.grabcocque said:It's always slightly jarring when something happens that reminds you Vince Cable and the Lib Dems still exist.
I do wonder if complete and total invisibility and political irrelevance is part of a strategy, or the party is simply evaporating.
Some say 14 labour mps did not vote0 -
Au contraire. They are at the vanguard. Remainers who realise they have lost.volcanopete said:Vince Cable and Tim Farron were absent from last night's close vote and they are to blame for Tory hard-Brexit.Where were these fearless remoaners who had previously criticised Labour for failure to oppose?
The Lib Dems are yellow to the core #Cablemustgo0 -
But Bernie is ten years older (if he won in 2020, he'd be older at inauguration than Reagan was on the day he left office), and is a self-declared socialist. Trump's politics did at least tap into a traditional strand of US political opinion. i don't think bernie's do, outside a few select places.Theuniondivvie said:
Trump's age, politics and the fact he wasn't a Republican didn't seem to matter much.MikeSmithson said:
There's massive doubt that Bernie would have done better. His age, his politics and the fact that he's not a Democrat.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it.
Apologies on the apostrophes, not sure what I'm doing with them usually.
I agree that of the three, not having a long-standing relationship with the Democrats is the least significant but it'll still matter in terms of endorsements and fundraising.0 -
'Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
16m16 minutes ago
Italy, SWG poll:
LEGA-ENF: 30% (-1)
M5S-EFDD: 30% (+1)
PD-S&D: 18%
FI-EPP: 8%
FdI-*: 4%
LeU-S&D: 3% (+1)
PaP-LEFT: 2%
+E-ALDE: 2%
Field work: 11/07/18 – 16/07/18
Sample size: 1,500"0 -
There is little sign of that at the moment.Sandpit said:
The dynamic of the race would have been very different with Bernie as the Dem candidate, certainly the disaffected swing states repulsed by Hillary might have gone the other way.TheJezziah said:
This is why the Democrats should have gone Bernie, only he could claim to stand up for them like Trump did.Sandpit said:
Okay, so how’s about that famous hardcore Republican Nazi Michael Moore, making much the same points a fortnight before the 2016 election?Dura_Ace said:
It's a terrible article that's poorly written and riven with the casual prejudice of lowered expectations.Sandpit said:
That’s a very, very good article.ydoethur said:This might be a good moment to repost this article:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
These people will probably not pay the slightest attention to Trump and Putin, because they will dismiss it as more 'fake news' from the liberal elite. He will still have a very solid support base in 2020.
The pertinent question however is whether he can hang on to those disillusioned democrats in Philadelphia, Michigan and Wisconsin. That might be more difficult. However, it also depends to a huge extent on the Democratic candidate, and with no current clear front-runner that remains (to quote another dodgy Donald) a known unknown.
The title is also a lie because those reasons have been discussed on many platforms.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YYZqnc-zY5o
I still think Trump is going to get re-elected as long as his health holds up, the liberal city-dwellers and media going bonkers over Trump really don’t understand small town America. It would be absolutely hillarious to watch them all completely lose their minds at his re-election.
The Dems need to choose their candidate carefully, but from what we’ve seen so far they are as likely to pick someone who’ll rack up millions of votes in CA and NY talking about transgender bathrooms - while Trump is talking to WI and MI about bringing more jobs home.
And the right wing media is in any event providing alternative talking points:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/07/the-end-of-all-illusions/565349/
“The big takeaway from Helsinki,” wrote the former Bush administration official Ambassador Nicholas Burns, was “Trump’s weakness beside Putin.” The right-wing press agreed: “Putin eats Trump’s lunch in Helsinki,” read the headline of a Fox opinion piece. “PUTIN DOMINATES IN HEL,” blared the Drudge Report.
The intolerable thing, in other words, was not what Trump said but that he appeared weak. In the slang of the alt-right and the Trumpist right, he looked like a cuck….0 -
I thought Cable would be quite a good leader.Cyclefree said:
The latter. They have the wrong leader. I quite liked Farron but the Lib Dems showed themselves to be rather illiberal in the way they treated him.grabcocque said:It's always slightly jarring when something happens that reminds you Vince Cable and the Lib Dems still exist.
I do wonder if complete and total invisibility and political irrelevance is part of a strategy, or the party is simply evaporating.
They have lost their confidence and mojo and Cable is not the man to revive it.
Incidentally, if Corbyn becomes PM while Trump is President we will be faced with the spectacle of two leaders who dismiss the views and expertise of their intelligence agencies and who may well be both mistrusted and (possibly) investigated by those same agencies.
Truly, we are blessed to live in interesting times.0 -
Layla, you're party's on its knees.El_Capitano said:
Layla Moran.Freggles said:What is Vince doing anyway.
It's time for him to hand over toJo Swinson
Absolute schoolboy error by Cable and Farron last night. Reading around various forums this morning it appears to have lost Cable a lot of goodwill.
Layla, they're begging, darling please.0 -
Hosepipe bans coming in just as we're getting some rain at last.0
-
0
-
Apropos a discussion here a couple weeks ago on the merits of 'implicit bias training'
https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/8717808742825205780 -
Just imagine that here:AndyJS said:'Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
16m16 minutes ago
Italy, SWG poll:
LEGA-ENF: 30% (-1)
M5S-EFDD: 30% (+1)
PD-S&D: 18%
FI-EPP: 8%
FdI-*: 4%
LeU-S&D: 3% (+1)
PaP-LEFT: 2%
+E-ALDE: 2%
Field work: 11/07/18 – 16/07/18
Sample size: 1,500"
UKIP 30%
Monster Raving Loony 30%
Labour 18%
Conservatives 8%0 -
What’s all this about Brexit only being a problem for large businesses?
Tory Party shitting on its natural support.
https://twitter.com/mightbnormal/status/1018976906996322304?s=210 -
Thanks to big tent politics, the loonies and kippers can be accommodated within the main parties.SandyRentool said:
Just imagine that here:AndyJS said:'Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
16m16 minutes ago
Italy, SWG poll:
LEGA-ENF: 30% (-1)
M5S-EFDD: 30% (+1)
PD-S&D: 18%
FI-EPP: 8%
FdI-*: 4%
LeU-S&D: 3% (+1)
PaP-LEFT: 2%
+E-ALDE: 2%
Field work: 11/07/18 – 16/07/18
Sample size: 1,500"
UKIP 30%
Monster Raving Loony 30%
Labour 18%
Conservatives 8%0 -
Then there is Warren for President, with Sanders as vice?david_herdson said:
But Bernie is ten years older (if he won in 2020, he'd be older at inauguration than Reagan was on the day he left office), and is a self-declared socialist. Trump's politics did at least tap into a traditional strand of US political opinion. i don't think bernie's do, outside a few select places.Theuniondivvie said:
Trump's age, politics and the fact he wasn't a Republican didn't seem to matter much.MikeSmithson said:
There's massive doubt that Bernie would have done better. His age, his politics and the fact that he's not a Democrat.TheJezziah said:
There is almost no doubt in my mind he would have done better. The main attacks Trump had were all blunted against Sanders, against Sanders Trump would have looked more the establishment figure.rkrkrk said:
I admit I thought the Dems should have picked Clinton because they were up against Trump/crazy right winger and it was no time to be taking a risk. Maybe Sanders would have done better.IanB2 said:
Exactly. We talk about his 'base' as if it represents his entire support. Yet there are always swing voters. The Dem's problem however is who to choose. There will be a lot of pressure from the upcoming generation for following in Sanders's footsteps.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. 100, supporters of any individual or party aren't a monolithic bloc. The last election was very close, and that was against a tired establishment figure who managed to deploy her resources in as poor a manner as those of Antiochus III at the Battle of Magnesia.
The Democrats may be able to cross the line with a centrist such is Trumps unpopularity now but they need to seriously think if it is worth risking another Trump term for it.
Apologies on the apostrophes, not sure what I'm doing with them usually.
I agree that of the three, not having a long-standing relationship with the Democrats is the least significant but it'll still matter in terms of endorsements and fundraising.0 -
The cash doesn't get destroyed though does it ? Goes to the 'trainers'Indigo1 said:Apropos a discussion here a couple weeks ago on the merits of 'implicit bias training'
https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/871780874282520578
You have to ponder how much of the economy is built on absolute horseshit these days.0 -
I thought it was well-established by now that Implicit Bias was basically a massive confidence trick.0
-
Horsesh*t is the futurePulpstar said:You have to ponder how much of the economy is built on absolute horseshit these days.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-switzerland-horse-dung-mushrooms-idUSKBN0MC129201503160 -
Why wasn't he pursuing the amazing opportunities available to "Global Britain" by targeting his products at exciting new export markets like Bhutan?Bromptonaut said:What’s all this about Brexit only being a problem for large businesses?
Tory Party shitting on its natural support.
https://twitter.com/mightbnormal/status/1018976906996322304?s=210 -
I think when a white police officer shoots an unarmed black child, and then a jury of white people acquit the officer of murder, there's nothing _implicit_ going on at all.Indigo1 said:Apropos a discussion here a couple weeks ago on the merits of 'implicit bias training'
https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/8717808742825205780 -
Yes -- as capitalist lackeys Anna Soubry and Jeremy Corbyn have been saying, the border problem is friction outside of a (not the) customs union.Bromptonaut said:What’s all this about Brexit only being a problem for large businesses?
Tory Party shitting on its natural support.
https://twitter.com/mightbnormal/status/1018976906996322304?s=21
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-44853389/tory-mp-anna-soubry-attacks-wealthy-brexiteers0 -
Layla Moran may be a good bet if things move quickly. Swinson gave birth two weeks ago. Plus, she has coalition connections - which will be used as the Corbynistas key attack line, and if the Momentum machine is good at one thing it's flinging mud at left-leaning opponents with any hint of apostasy in their past. Moran could run as a candidate aiming to give the party a fresh start as insurgents on behalf of a liberal Britain cowed by extremists in both of the major parties.Freggles said:
What is Vince doing anyway.Pulpstar said:Elon had a bad day on twitter on sunday,
France rioted monday
Not looking great for Vince & Tim Farron on tuesday
It's time for him to hand over to Jo Swinson, then when the Tories kick out their second female leader in favour of a right wing older man, she can have a USP.
Also, optics side, because he's doing a poor job0 -
Good to know, I probably shovel the most horseshit of anyone on pb.comBeverley_C said:
Horsesh*t is the futurePulpstar said:You have to ponder how much of the economy is built on absolute horseshit these days.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-switzerland-horse-dung-mushrooms-idUSKBN0MC129201503160 -
He claims to manufacture satellites in one of his tweets. What with all the anti-Brexit flashmobs he seems to have been organising for at least the last six months, one does wonder how he's had the time to build spacecraft.Dura_Ace said:
Why wasn't he pursuing the amazing opportunities available to "Global Britain" by targeting his products at exciting new export markets like Bhutan?Bromptonaut said:What’s all this about Brexit only being a problem for large businesses?
Tory Party shitting on its natural support.
https://twitter.com/mightbnormal/status/1018976906996322304?s=210 -
He was pretty good as acting leader a decade earlier.Sean_F said:
I thought Cable would be quite a good leader.Cyclefree said:
The latter. They have the wrong leader. I quite liked Farron but the Lib Dems showed themselves to be rather illiberal in the way they treated him.grabcocque said:It's always slightly jarring when something happens that reminds you Vince Cable and the Lib Dems still exist.
I do wonder if complete and total invisibility and political irrelevance is part of a strategy, or the party is simply evaporating.
They have lost their confidence and mojo and Cable is not the man to revive it.
Incidentally, if Corbyn becomes PM while Trump is President we will be faced with the spectacle of two leaders who dismiss the views and expertise of their intelligence agencies and who may well be both mistrusted and (possibly) investigated by those same agencies.
Truly, we are blessed to live in interesting times.0 -
Can I bet on a Government defeat ?CarlottaVance said:
Looks fairly obvious seeing as all last night's rebels will rebel again and Tim Farron won't be preaching about gay sex this time round.0 -
Was he actually paired?Pulpstar said:
Can I bet on a Government defeat ?CarlottaVance said:
Looks fairly obvious seeing as all last night's rebels will rebel again and Tim Farron won't be preaching about gay sex this time round.
Also, the government’s margin was 3. They can afford Cable and Farron voting against.0 -
Had Cable and Farron voted the Government would still have won by 1 vote.Pulpstar said:
Can I bet on a Government defeat ?CarlottaVance said:
Looks fairly obvious seeing as all last night's rebels will rebel again and Tim Farron won't be preaching about gay sex this time round.0 -
Did any Tories abstain from last night's vote ?RoyalBlue said:
Was he actually paired?Pulpstar said:
Can I bet on a Government defeat ?CarlottaVance said:
Looks fairly obvious seeing as all last night's rebels will rebel again and Tim Farron won't be preaching about gay sex this time round.0 -
I thought that WAS the latest UK polling!SandyRentool said:
Just imagine that here:AndyJS said:'Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
16m16 minutes ago
Italy, SWG poll:
LEGA-ENF: 30% (-1)
M5S-EFDD: 30% (+1)
PD-S&D: 18%
FI-EPP: 8%
FdI-*: 4%
LeU-S&D: 3% (+1)
PaP-LEFT: 2%
+E-ALDE: 2%
Field work: 11/07/18 – 16/07/18
Sample size: 1,500"
UKIP 30%
Monster Raving Loony 30%
Labour 18%
Conservatives 8%0 -
Cable really screwed up. He cannot claim the LDs are serious on Brexit.0
-
I love the way anyone would assume some bot without a real name and face and FBPE next to their name is capable of running an actual business and employing people. Given the amount of time they spent on twitter it's fair to say they never had a job or their business was destined to fail anyway.Bromptonaut said:What’s all this about Brexit only being a problem for large businesses?
Tory Party shitting on its natural support.
https://twitter.com/mightbnormal/status/1018976906996322304?s=210 -
It depends how many Conservatives rebel, how many Labour MPs rebel, and how many on both sides are absent.Pulpstar said:
Can I bet on a Government defeat ?CarlottaVance said:
Looks fairly obvious seeing as all last night's rebels will rebel again and Tim Farron won't be preaching about gay sex this time round.0 -
Hammond Morgan? Is that what ydoethur plays?CarlottaVance said:0 -
As opposed to the Morgan Hammond which will be Global Britain's answer to Tesla.DecrepitJohnL said:
Hammond Morgan? Is that what ydoethur plays?CarlottaVance said:0 -
A Govt. defeat will be an extra side-order of fucked-upness....Pulpstar said:
Can I bet on a Government defeat ?CarlottaVance said:
Looks fairly obvious seeing as all last night's rebels will rebel again and Tim Farron won't be preaching about gay sex this time round.
But beware - if Cable and Farron were paired, no net benefit to their being there tonight.0 -
Thanks for a genuine LOL moment!Pulpstar said:0 -
Looking through the lens of your fanaticism? Not everything is about political point scoring, there will be small businesses affected by all this stuff and probably more affected than some large businesses because small businesses lack a large staff to handle the issues and often lack large financial buffers to help with cashflow issues.Brom said:
I love the way anyone would assume some bot without a real name and face and FBPE next to their name is capable of running an actual business and employing people. Given the amount of time they spent on twitter it's fair to say they never had a job or their business was destined to fail anyway.Bromptonaut said:What’s all this about Brexit only being a problem for large businesses?
Tory Party shitting on its natural support.
twitter.com/mightbnormal/status/1018976906996322304?s=210 -
A lot of water flowed under the bridge between 2007 and 2017 but Cable stayed.justin124 said:
He was pretty good as acting leader a decade earlier.Sean_F said:
I thought Cable would be quite a good leader.Cyclefree said:
The latter. They have the wrong leader. I quite liked Farron but the Lib Dems showed themselves to be rather illiberal in the way they treated him.grabcocque said:It's always slightly jarring when something happens that reminds you Vince Cable and the Lib Dems still exist.
I do wonder if complete and total invisibility and political irrelevance is part of a strategy, or the party is simply evaporating.
They have lost their confidence and mojo and Cable is not the man to revive it.
Incidentally, if Corbyn becomes PM while Trump is President we will be faced with the spectacle of two leaders who dismiss the views and expertise of their intelligence agencies and who may well be both mistrusted and (possibly) investigated by those same agencies.
Truly, we are blessed to live in interesting times.0 -
I think I've sussed Theresa May's cunning plan. She'll accept ALL amendments. Since one lot of amendments directly contradicts the other lot, she can always claim that she's followed the will of parliament, whatever she does.
Admittedly this is a novel development in constitutional practice, as well as bonkers, but, hey, muddling through is how we do things in the UK.0 -
It's always so reassuring that, in these times of intense divisions, we can still all unite to laugh at the Lib Dems.0
-
What are your thoughts on this evening's customs union amendment ?Richard_Nabavi said:I think I've sussed Theresa May's cunning plan. She'll accept ALL amendments. Since one lot of amendments directly contradicts the other lot, she can always claim that she's followed the will of parliament, whatever she does.
Admittedly this is a novel development in constitutional practice, as well as bonkers, but, hey, muddling through is how we do things in the UK.0 -
Probably a very narrow win for the government, but it's impossible to be sure.Pulpstar said:
What are your thoughts on this evening's customs union amendment ?Richard_Nabavi said:I think I've sussed Theresa May's cunning plan. She'll accept ALL amendments. Since one lot of amendments directly contradicts the other lot, she can always claim that she's followed the will of parliament, whatever she does.
Admittedly this is a novel development in constitutional practice, as well as bonkers, but, hey, muddling through is how we do things in the UK.0
