Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The WH2020 betting and polling continue to look good for Biden

1235

Comments

  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    STILL waiting for the shoe that hasn't dropped - SCOTUS ruling on the Trump taxes case. Methinks the Chief Justice may be trying to line up the greatest majority possible.

    Stay tuned, sports fans!
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,952
    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    She will be in court later today. We will soon see therefore.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    edited July 2020

    MrEd said:

    US stock markets poised for a strong open after US jobs data looked better than expected.

    Fantastic for my oil investments.
    Maybe not so good for Biden investments though
    Sounding a bit like a Trumpster there, @contrarian :)
    Not really a supporter, just putting the other side of the argument. As usual!
    C'mon. You strongly want Trump to beat Biden. You all but wear a tee shirt saying so. But I have not heard you talk much about the betting on it, so I'm curious about that aspect. Have you backed him to win too?
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    dixiedean said:

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    She will be in court later today. We will soon see therefore.
    It will, for a start, be fascinating to find out why she is only arrested today. If she is in America (where she must have been, for a while, because lockdown)

    The most persuasive theory I read, before this, was that she fled, probably to Israel, where the Israelis maybe kept her under house arrest

    Now it turns out she's been right under the nose of the FBI in New Hampshire.

    Unless she was in an Osama-bin-Laden-like bunker they must have known. Yet did nothing, until today??
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    LadyG - I'm not sure that's true. The Nazis really did consider shipping all the Jews to Madagascar, for instance. Or Siberia.

    What Hitler wanted, at first, was a Europe that was "Judenrein" - "free of Jews". This didn't necessarily mean killing them all, just moving them far far away.

    It was at the Wannsee Conference that this policy crystallised into the Final Solution.

    Temporary expedients. Mein Kampf is pretty clear: earth would be a better place without the Jews. Only one logical outcome. Might take a while but in the end - the Final Solution.

  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553

    LadyG - I'm not sure that's true. The Nazis really did consider shipping all the Jews to Madagascar, for instance. Or Siberia.

    What Hitler wanted, at first, was a Europe that was "Judenrein" - "free of Jews". This didn't necessarily mean killing them all, just moving them far far away.

    It was at the Wannsee Conference that this policy crystallised into the Final Solution.

    SeaShanty - Temporary expedients. Mein Kampf is pretty clear: earth would be a better place without the Jews. Only one logical outcome. Might take a while but in the end - the Final Solution.



  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221

    LadyG - I'm not sure that's true. The Nazis really did consider shipping all the Jews to Madagascar, for instance. Or Siberia.

    What Hitler wanted, at first, was a Europe that was "Judenrein" - "free of Jews". This didn't necessarily mean killing them all, just moving them far far away.

    It was at the Wannsee Conference that this policy crystallised into the Final Solution.

    Temporary expedients. Mein Kampf is pretty clear: earth would be a better place without the Jews. Only one logical outcome. Might take a while but in the end - the Final Solution.



    Maybe. We will never know as we cannot read Hitler's mind. Perhaps that is for the best.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,078
    @HYUFD are you still laughing at any suggestion that there will be tax rises?
  • Options
    I believe we will see 40 Tory/40 Lab soon.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    I believe we will see 40 Tory/40 Lab soon.

    Given the economic penury on the way, there will almost certainly be labour leads going forward, I would have thought
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,538
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    Will 'X wasn't genocide cos it only killed 6 million of Y, and how do we know it was 6 million anyway' be Starkey's next schtick?

    Is Starkey gaslighting people who believe the Atlantic slave trade was one of the great crimes of the modern age?
    Yes, the whole statement is bizarre, quite apart from the hideous cuss word "damn".

    There is a good argument that slavery was and is a grotesque stain on human civilisation, but has never been a genocide, as such: slaves have been taken from all human races, by all other human races. But he makes it in the most slapdash and incoherent way.

    Did he have a stiff pre-lunch lockdown gin and tonic?

    I think a slave trade that lead to millions, maybe tens of millions, of deaths of Africans, can reasonably be described as a genocide
    No. A genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large group of people from one ethnic group, or an attempt to kill them all".

    Slavery was never that. It was explicitly not that: they wanted the slaves alive so they could work. The many, many deaths were an unfortunate loss of valuable goods.

    I am not in any way diminishing the horror of slavery. There is an argument to say that slavery is the greatest crime humans have done to other humans, taken in toto. Hundreds of millions of people have been slaved over the centuries.

    But genocide is an important and powerful word and we shouldn't weaken it by using it too liberally.
    The fact people survived isn't relevant to the question. That's a hole Starkey has fallen into. The question is whether the killing on a mass scale of a people of targeted ethnicity is sufficient to be deemed genocide, or whether there needs to be a deliberate intention to eliminate a race. Problem is the moral distinctions aren't clear. So Nazi concentration camps with gas chambers is genocide; without gas chambers it isn't. Not sure about the usefulness of that distinction.
    I thought it was quite clear that the Nazis were engaged in genocide before the gas chambers - they had formed death squads to eliminate Jews, they were meticulous about counting Jews in territory they conquered for the purpose of eliminating them, etc.

    The gas chambers came later because they were more efficient at killing large numbers than using bullets and firing squads. This is a difference in degree, but intent.
    The German economy of 1930s was a slave economy. The concentration camps were a key part of that. The government was completely indifferent to who survived and who didn't - plenty more where they came from. But they did need those people to survive for a while to be productive. In that sense no different from the owners and traders of the UK slave trade.
    Yes, but as has been pointed out, that was a means to an end, which was race destruction.

    The slave trade is of a different nature, as its victims were viewed as tradeable assets. Where it shades into genocide is that from the point of view of the slaver, the destruction of its victims through overwork was a benefit, since it created additional demand - and the more brutal forms of plantation slavery did just that.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    @HYUFD are you still laughing at any suggestion that there will be tax rises?

    From this Tory government no, there will be neither tax rises nor spending cuts.

    A Starmer government would certainly increase tax however
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    Will 'X wasn't genocide cos it only killed 6 million of Y, and how do we know it was 6 million anyway' be Starkey's next schtick?

    Is Starkey gaslighting people who believe the Atlantic slave trade was one of the great crimes of the modern age?
    Yes, the whole statement is bizarre, quite apart from the hideous cuss word "damn".

    There is a good argument that slavery was and is a grotesque stain on human civilisation, but has never been a genocide, as such: slaves have been taken from all human races, by all other human races. But he makes it in the most slapdash and incoherent way.

    Did he have a stiff pre-lunch lockdown gin and tonic?

    I think a slave trade that lead to millions, maybe tens of millions, of deaths of Africans, can reasonably be described as a genocide
    No. A genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large group of people from one ethnic group, or an attempt to kill them all".

    Slavery was never that. It was explicitly not that: they wanted the slaves alive so they could work. The many, many deaths were an unfortunate loss of valuable goods.

    I am not in any way diminishing the horror of slavery. There is an argument to say that slavery is the greatest crime humans have done to other humans, taken in toto. Hundreds of millions of people have been slaved over the centuries.

    But genocide is an important and powerful word and we shouldn't weaken it by using it too liberally.
    Attempts to make out slavery was genocide, as if simply slavery=bad is not enough, is diminishing what actually happened. Slavery doesn't have to be genocide to be something horrific that should never happen again.
    Yes, it's a kind of distraction, even a diversion.

    Slavery is a uniquely awful form of human evil: treating other humans as objects, possessions, or animals, to be bought, sold, bred and abused.

    It stands alone in its scale and horror. It should be seen as such.
    True, but it is different from the attempted extermination of a race, like the holocaust. The Nazis did not want anything to do with the Jews. They just wanted them gone. Eliminated (though admittedly some were used as slave labour).

    Two kinds of horrible evil. But two different kinds.
    Actually, the Nazi policy evolved from WorkThemReallyHardAsSlaves to WorkThem ToDeathAsSlaves and then to KillThem.

    The first policy was then continued with groups such as Russian prisoners of war. Whose conditions and death rates resembled the worst versions of the older forms of slavery (mines were always particularly horrible for slaves)
    Hitler's policy was ALWAYS to rid the earth of the Jewish people. Any seeming evolution was strictly tactical.
    I'm not sure that's true. The Nazis really did consider shipping all the Jews to Madagascar, for instance. Or Siberia.

    What Hitler wanted, at first, was a Europe that was "Judenrein" - "free of Jews". This didn't necessarily mean killing them all, just moving them far far away.
    Cue Ken Livingstone for a monotonic musing at great length on and around this point.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,399
    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    US stock markets poised for a strong open after US jobs data looked better than expected.

    Fantastic for my oil investments.
    Maybe not so good for Biden investments though
    Sounding a bit like a Trumpster there, @contrarian :)
    Not really a supporter, just putting the other side of the argument. As usual!
    C'mon. You strongly want Trump to beat Biden. You all but wear a tee shirt saying so. But I have not heard you talk much about the betting on it, so I'm curious about that aspect. Have you backed him to win too?
    I wouldn't dream of backing Trump, because I have no idea who will win, and so I wouldn't have the courage of my convictions. But I wouldn't mind if he won. I can readily see how ghastly he is. I can see how an American who was very conscious of how America is perceived abroad would fervently wish him gone. But my feelings on the subject are ambivalent. For a few reasons, but firstly and foremostly because for whatever reason (quite possibly because he is in hock to foreign powers, who knows), Trump has not started World War III. Hillary would have. We could, in 2020, have been fighting a disease, and fighting each other - thank the heavens we are only doing one.

    Secondly because I think with 'America first', Trump is only crudely re-expressing America's consistent foreign policy, from the declaration of independence, until today. Others may be desperate to put the lipstick back on the pig, but I can't get excited about that.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    edited July 2020
    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Second dose of liquid chemo today, first went well with no side effects hopefully this goes just as well. Hot and humid out here now dealing with forty localized outbreaks Aragon and Andalusia most cases, first death in Murcia for 28 days. All sources located and tracing and quarantine underway.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,101

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
    It will never happen.
    Let's put it this way, if the US won't extradite the wife of a minor spy then the UK won't give up the favourite son of our beloved head of state.
    But Andrew might have to avoid the States from now on.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,952
    HYUFD said:

    @HYUFD are you still laughing at any suggestion that there will be tax rises?

    From this Tory government no, there will be neither tax rises nor spending cuts.

    A Starmer government would certainly increase tax however
    If we have no tax rises or spending cuts of any kind whatsoever between now and 2024, then that is a racing certainty yes.
    For Starmer or any one else.
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221

    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
    Yeah, but.

    Have you ever talked to an elk, though?

    They look all majestic and peaceful as they canter through the birch forests of Oregon, but give them a few beers, and out it comes, right on cue. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the works. Hideous. They also think coyotes are intrinsically lazy.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    @HYUFD are you still laughing at any suggestion that there will be tax rises?

    From this Tory government no, there will be neither tax rises nor spending cuts.

    A Starmer government would certainly increase tax however
    If we have no tax rises or spending cuts of any kind whatsoever between now and 2024, then that is a racing certainty yes.
    For Starmer or any one else.
    Not from Boris who couldn't give a toss about the deficit
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    HYUFD said:

    @HYUFD are you still laughing at any suggestion that there will be tax rises?

    From this Tory government no, there will be neither tax rises nor spending cuts.

    A Starmer government would certainly increase tax however
    One to bookmark, I think.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    From late 1930s - early 1940s to great British parliamentarian diarists, Henry "Chips" Channon and Harold Nicholson.

    Chips Channon drank the Hitlerian koo-aid in large sips. Was impressed by the "New Germany" and eager to have Ambassador Ribbentrop over to dine with the creme (albeit somewhat curdled) of the British establishment.

    Harold Nicolson saw through the Nazi fraud (despite being a friend of Sir Oswald Mosley) almost immediately. Not only did NOT want to break bread with the Fuhrer's favorite champagne salesman, he had no problem calling him and his entourage outright envoys of evil.

    Diaries of Chips Channon are a fun read and great historical resource. BUT diaries of Harold Nicholson are better and greater by far.

    If you've got the time & money post-pandemic, visit yet another of HN's legacies: Sissinghurst Castle Gardens.

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    US stock markets poised for a strong open after US jobs data looked better than expected.

    Fantastic for my oil investments.
    Maybe not so good for Biden investments though
    Sounding a bit like a Trumpster there, @contrarian :)
    Not really a supporter, just putting the other side of the argument. As usual!
    C'mon. You strongly want Trump to beat Biden. You all but wear a tee shirt saying so. But I have not heard you talk much about the betting on it, so I'm curious about that aspect. Have you backed him to win too?
    I wouldn't dream of backing Trump, because I have no idea who will win, and so I wouldn't have the courage of my convictions. But I wouldn't mind if he won. I can readily see how ghastly he is. I can see how an American who was very conscious of how America is perceived abroad would fervently wish him gone. But my feelings on the subject are ambivalent. For a few reasons, but firstly and foremostly because for whatever reason (quite possibly because he is in hock to foreign powers, who knows), Trump has not started World War III. Hillary would have. We could, in 2020, have been fighting a disease, and fighting each other - thank the heavens we are only doing one.

    Secondly because I think with 'America first', Trump is only crudely re-expressing America's consistent foreign policy, from the declaration of independence, until today. Others may be desperate to put the lipstick back on the pig, but I can't get excited about that.
    Well if you genuinely hold the firm view that Hillary Clinton as POTUS would have started World War III, it makes perfect sense to have wanted Trump to win in 2016. I would have been rooting for him too if I'd thought that.

    But that was then, this is now. It only holds again this time if you think Sleepy Joe is also hot to trot for some World War III. Which seems a bit far-fetched.

    As to your second reason. OK, so you'd rather a pig go "au naturel" than make a bit of an effort. I can't see any upside at all to that.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,171

    I believe we will see 40 Tory/40 Lab soon.

    Yep, but what will that mean? Are you old enough to remember the eighties? The alliance? I cannot understand your persistent fixation with opinion polls where the next election is probably 3 years and 9 months distant, and the government has an 80 seat majority...
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,399
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    Will 'X wasn't genocide cos it only killed 6 million of Y, and how do we know it was 6 million anyway' be Starkey's next schtick?

    Is Starkey gaslighting people who believe the Atlantic slave trade was one of the great crimes of the modern age?
    Yes, the whole statement is bizarre, quite apart from the hideous cuss word "damn".

    There is a good argument that slavery was and is a grotesque stain on human civilisation, but has never been a genocide, as such: slaves have been taken from all human races, by all other human races. But he makes it in the most slapdash and incoherent way.

    Did he have a stiff pre-lunch lockdown gin and tonic?

    I think a slave trade that lead to millions, maybe tens of millions, of deaths of Africans, can reasonably be described as a genocide
    No. A genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large group of people from one ethnic group, or an attempt to kill them all".

    Slavery was never that. It was explicitly not that: they wanted the slaves alive so they could work. The many, many deaths were an unfortunate loss of valuable goods.

    I am not in any way diminishing the horror of slavery. There is an argument to say that slavery is the greatest crime humans have done to other humans, taken in toto. Hundreds of millions of people have been slaved over the centuries.

    But genocide is an important and powerful word and we shouldn't weaken it by using it too liberally.
    The fact people survived isn't relevant to the question. That's a hole Starkey has fallen into. The question is whether the killing on a mass scale of a people of targeted ethnicity is sufficient to be deemed genocide, or whether there needs to be a deliberate intention to eliminate a race. Problem is the moral distinctions aren't clear. So Nazi concentration camps with gas chambers is genocide; without gas chambers it isn't. Not sure about the usefulness of that distinction.
    I thought it was quite clear that the Nazis were engaged in genocide before the gas chambers - they had formed death squads to eliminate Jews, they were meticulous about counting Jews in territory they conquered for the purpose of eliminating them, etc.

    The gas chambers came later because they were more efficient at killing large numbers than using bullets and firing squads. This is a difference in degree, but intent.
    The German economy of 1930s was a slave economy. The concentration camps were a key part of that. The government was completely indifferent to who survived and who didn't - plenty more where they came from. But they did need those people to survive for a while to be productive. In that sense no different from the owners and traders of the UK slave trade.
    Yes, but as has been pointed out, that was a means to an end, which was race destruction.

    The slave trade is of a different nature, as its victims were viewed as tradeable assets. Where it shades into genocide is that from the point of view of the slaver, the destruction of its victims through overwork was a benefit, since it created additional demand - and the more brutal forms of plantation slavery did just that.
    I studied Germany in WW2 a bit as part of my undergraduate degree - but from an economics standpoint.

    As I seem to recall, the policy against Jews was indeed one of destruction, not slavery evolving into destruction. I seem to remember a journal by Himmler, actively regretting that they had not seen the Jews as a source of labour (as Germany's lack of human resource as the war progressed became a bigger and bigger problem), rather than a problem to be 'solved'. Enslavement would have been quite literally 'the lesser of two evils', as it would have entailed keeping the Jewish population alive and healthy enough to work. But the Nazi's very pernicious brand of wickedness prevented that from happening.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
    Yeah, but.

    Have you ever talked to an elk, though?

    They look all majestic and peaceful as they canter through the birch forests of Oregon, but give them a few beers, and out it comes, right on cue. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the works. Hideous. They also think coyotes are intrinsically lazy.
    Elk also think they've got the right to poop anywhere they please. AND think nothing of wrecking your new car by jumping into the road anytime they get the notion.

    And ladies, IF you've ever been offended/insulted by some yob shouting "Look at the rack on that babe!" well, you know who is REALLY to blame.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    From late 1930s - early 1940s to great British parliamentarian diarists, Henry "Chips" Channon and Harold Nicholson.

    Chips Channon drank the Hitlerian koo-aid in large sips. Was impressed by the "New Germany" and eager to have Ambassador Ribbentrop over to dine with the creme (albeit somewhat curdled) of the British establishment.

    Harold Nicolson saw through the Nazi fraud (despite being a friend of Sir Oswald Mosley) almost immediately. Not only did NOT want to break bread with the Fuhrer's favorite champagne salesman, he had no problem calling him and his entourage outright envoys of evil.

    Diaries of Chips Channon are a fun read and great historical resource. BUT diaries of Harold Nicholson are better and greater by far.

    If you've got the time & money post-pandemic, visit yet another of HN's legacies: Sissinghurst Castle Gardens.

    Nicolson I believe, not a relative
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    You do realize that you would have frotted yourself senseless by following the polls for 4 and a half years of the Miliband leadership, only to see him go down in flames and the Tories win a majority in 2015? Not to mention your absolute certainty that Corbynite Labour was guaranteed victory from 2017 to 2019, which worked out ... how, exactly?

    Roy Jenkins famously compared Tony Blair's meticulous caution and humility in the run-up to 1997 to an elderly butler carrying a priceless Ming vase across a polished marble floor. You're racing it round the Indianapolis Speedway without a seatbelt...

    When will you learn?
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Ghislaine Maxweii arrested by FBI.

    Prince Andrew might be concerned.
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
    Yeah, but.

    Have you ever talked to an elk, though?

    They look all majestic and peaceful as they canter through the birch forests of Oregon, but give them a few beers, and out it comes, right on cue. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the works. Hideous. They also think coyotes are intrinsically lazy.
    Elk also think they've got the right to poop anywhere they please. AND think nothing of wrecking your new car by jumping into the road anytime they get the notion.

    And ladies, IF you've ever been offended/insulted by some yob shouting "Look at the rack on that babe!" well, you know who is REALLY to blame.
    That whole "First they came for Thomas Jefferson" thing?

    I didn't know we'd get to this bit: "Then they came for the elks"
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187

    I believe we will see 40 Tory/40 Lab soon.

    Yep, but what will that mean? Are you old enough to remember the eighties? The alliance? I cannot understand your persistent fixation with opinion polls where the next election is probably 3 years and 9 months distant, and the government has an 80 seat majority...
    You can't fatten the cow on market day.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
    It will never happen.
    Let's put it this way, if the US won't extradite the wife of a minor spy then the UK won't give up the favourite son of our beloved head of state.
    But Andrew might have to avoid the States from now on.
    Point about the hit-and-run-across-the-ocean killer driver is VERY well taken. That was a travesty of the "Special Relationship".

    As for Prince Arsehole, would indeed advise him to NEVER step foot on these shores (Pacific and Atlantic) and anywhere in between EVER again.

    Know he's dumb as fuq and twice as nasty, but doubt even he's THAT stupid.

    Probably ought to avoid Canada & rest of Commonwealth as well. In fact, British government should exile His Royal Foulness to one of the less attractive rocks in the South Shetlands - without his anorak.
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,308

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    Will 'X wasn't genocide cos it only killed 6 million of Y, and how do we know it was 6 million anyway' be Starkey's next schtick?

    Is Starkey gaslighting people who believe the Atlantic slave trade was one of the great crimes of the modern age?
    Yes, the whole statement is bizarre, quite apart from the hideous cuss word "damn".

    There is a good argument that slavery was and is a grotesque stain on human civilisation, but has never been a genocide, as such: slaves have been taken from all human races, by all other human races. But he makes it in the most slapdash and incoherent way.

    Did he have a stiff pre-lunch lockdown gin and tonic?

    I think a slave trade that lead to millions, maybe tens of millions, of deaths of Africans, can reasonably be described as a genocide
    No. A genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large group of people from one ethnic group, or an attempt to kill them all".

    Slavery was never that. It was explicitly not that: they wanted the slaves alive so they could work. The many, many deaths were an unfortunate loss of valuable goods.

    I am not in any way diminishing the horror of slavery. There is an argument to say that slavery is the greatest crime humans have done to other humans, taken in toto. Hundreds of millions of people have been slaved over the centuries.

    But genocide is an important and powerful word and we shouldn't weaken it by using it too liberally.
    The fact people survived isn't relevant to the question. That's a hole Starkey has fallen into. The question is whether the killing on a mass scale of a people of targeted ethnicity is sufficient to be deemed genocide, or whether there needs to be a deliberate intention to eliminate a race. Problem is the moral distinctions aren't clear. So Nazi concentration camps with gas chambers is genocide; without gas chambers it isn't. Not sure about the usefulness of that distinction.
    I thought it was quite clear that the Nazis were engaged in genocide before the gas chambers - they had formed death squads to eliminate Jews, they were meticulous about counting Jews in territory they conquered for the purpose of eliminating them, etc.

    The gas chambers came later because they were more efficient at killing large numbers than using bullets and firing squads. This is a difference in degree, but intent.
    The German economy of 1930s was a slave economy. The concentration camps were a key part of that. The government was completely indifferent to who survived and who didn't - plenty more where they came from. But they did need those people to survive for a while to be productive. In that sense no different from the owners and traders of the UK slave trade.
    Yes, but as has been pointed out, that was a means to an end, which was race destruction.

    The slave trade is of a different nature, as its victims were viewed as tradeable assets. Where it shades into genocide is that from the point of view of the slaver, the destruction of its victims through overwork was a benefit, since it created additional demand - and the more brutal forms of plantation slavery did just that.
    I studied Germany in WW2 a bit as part of my undergraduate degree - but from an economics standpoint.

    As I seem to recall, the policy against Jews was indeed one of destruction, not slavery evolving into destruction. I seem to remember a journal by Himmler, actively regretting that they had not seen the Jews as a source of labour (as Germany's lack of human resource as the war progressed became a bigger and bigger problem), rather than a problem to be 'solved'. Enslavement would have been quite literally 'the lesser of two evils', as it would have entailed keeping the Jewish population alive and healthy enough to work. But the Nazi's very pernicious brand of wickedness prevented that from happening.
    In his book on WW2 Max Hastings also takes the view that it would have made much more sense economically to enlist the Jews rather than try to eradicate them, which was an expensive as well as inhumane business.
  • Options

    I believe we will see 40 Tory/40 Lab soon.

    Yep, but what will that mean? Are you old enough to remember the eighties? The alliance? I cannot understand your persistent fixation with opinion polls where the next election is probably 3 years and 9 months distant, and the government has an 80 seat majority...
    I don't have much of a life
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,139

    You do realize that you would have frotted yourself senseless by following the polls for 4 and a half years of the Miliband leadership, only to see him go down in flames and the Tories win a majority in 2015? Not to mention your absolute certainty that Corbynite Labour was guaranteed victory from 2017 to 2019, which worked out ... how, exactly?

    Roy Jenkins famously compared Tony Blair's meticulous caution and humility in the run-up to 1997 to an elderly butler carrying a priceless Ming vase across a polished marble floor. You're racing it round the Indianapolis Speedway without a seatbelt...

    When will you learn?
    I never expected confidence in the Government to decline so markedly in such a short time.

    I did expect post-EU transition cross over at the end of next year, but it could come sooner.

    We still have the post-Covid economic drag to come. Life is going to get tough for the Conservatives, I suspect quite soon.

    I am hoping for no second wave and Johnson to get his act together, but I am not holding my breath for either.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited July 2020
    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    She won't "commit suicide".


    She'll "die with coronavirus".
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,952

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    Will 'X wasn't genocide cos it only killed 6 million of Y, and how do we know it was 6 million anyway' be Starkey's next schtick?

    Is Starkey gaslighting people who believe the Atlantic slave trade was one of the great crimes of the modern age?
    Yes, the whole statement is bizarre, quite apart from the hideous cuss word "damn".

    There is a good argument that slavery was and is a grotesque stain on human civilisation, but has never been a genocide, as such: slaves have been taken from all human races, by all other human races. But he makes it in the most slapdash and incoherent way.

    Did he have a stiff pre-lunch lockdown gin and tonic?

    I think a slave trade that lead to millions, maybe tens of millions, of deaths of Africans, can reasonably be described as a genocide
    No. A genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large group of people from one ethnic group, or an attempt to kill them all".

    Slavery was never that. It was explicitly not that: they wanted the slaves alive so they could work. The many, many deaths were an unfortunate loss of valuable goods.

    I am not in any way diminishing the horror of slavery. There is an argument to say that slavery is the greatest crime humans have done to other humans, taken in toto. Hundreds of millions of people have been slaved over the centuries.

    But genocide is an important and powerful word and we shouldn't weaken it by using it too liberally.
    The fact people survived isn't relevant to the question. That's a hole Starkey has fallen into. The question is whether the killing on a mass scale of a people of targeted ethnicity is sufficient to be deemed genocide, or whether there needs to be a deliberate intention to eliminate a race. Problem is the moral distinctions aren't clear. So Nazi concentration camps with gas chambers is genocide; without gas chambers it isn't. Not sure about the usefulness of that distinction.
    I thought it was quite clear that the Nazis were engaged in genocide before the gas chambers - they had formed death squads to eliminate Jews, they were meticulous about counting Jews in territory they conquered for the purpose of eliminating them, etc.

    The gas chambers came later because they were more efficient at killing large numbers than using bullets and firing squads. This is a difference in degree, but intent.
    The German economy of 1930s was a slave economy. The concentration camps were a key part of that. The government was completely indifferent to who survived and who didn't - plenty more where they came from. But they did need those people to survive for a while to be productive. In that sense no different from the owners and traders of the UK slave trade.
    Yes, but as has been pointed out, that was a means to an end, which was race destruction.

    The slave trade is of a different nature, as its victims were viewed as tradeable assets. Where it shades into genocide is that from the point of view of the slaver, the destruction of its victims through overwork was a benefit, since it created additional demand - and the more brutal forms of plantation slavery did just that.
    I studied Germany in WW2 a bit as part of my undergraduate degree - but from an economics standpoint.

    As I seem to recall, the policy against Jews was indeed one of destruction, not slavery evolving into destruction. I seem to remember a journal by Himmler, actively regretting that they had not seen the Jews as a source of labour (as Germany's lack of human resource as the war progressed became a bigger and bigger problem), rather than a problem to be 'solved'. Enslavement would have been quite literally 'the lesser of two evils', as it would have entailed keeping the Jewish population alive and healthy enough to work. But the Nazi's very pernicious brand of wickedness prevented that from happening.
    In his book on WW2 Max Hastings also takes the view that it would have made much more sense economically to enlist the Jews rather than try to eradicate them, which was an expensive as well as inhumane business.
    Nazis weren't big on sense. Economic or otherwise.
    It was one of their defining features :)
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    nichomar said:

    Second dose of liquid chemo today, first went well with no side effects hopefully this goes just as well. Hot and humid out here now dealing with forty localized outbreaks Aragon and Andalusia most cases, first death in Murcia for 28 days. All sources located and tracing and quarantine underway.

    Good luck with it all.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    @HYUFD are you still laughing at any suggestion that there will be tax rises?

    From this Tory government no, there will be neither tax rises nor spending cuts.

    A Starmer government would certainly increase tax however
    Good
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
    It will never happen.
    Let's put it this way, if the US won't extradite the wife of a minor spy then the UK won't give up the favourite son of our beloved head of state.
    But Andrew might have to avoid the States from now on.
    Might start sweating again though.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
    Yeah, but.

    Have you ever talked to an elk, though?

    They look all majestic and peaceful as they canter through the birch forests of Oregon, but give them a few beers, and out it comes, right on cue. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the works. Hideous. They also think coyotes are intrinsically lazy.
    Elk also think they've got the right to poop anywhere they please. AND think nothing of wrecking your new car by jumping into the road anytime they get the notion.

    And ladies, IF you've ever been offended/insulted by some yob shouting "Look at the rack on that babe!" well, you know who is REALLY to blame.
    That whole "First they came for Thomas Jefferson" thing?

    I didn't know we'd get to this bit: "Then they came for the elks"
    Personally think elk are egotistical show-offs. Much prefer moose, most likely because of early brainwashing of my tender (if that's the right word) mind by the great "Rocky and Bullwinkle Show" co-staring Bullwinkle J. Moose the pride of Frostbite Falls, Minnesota.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    dixiedean said:

    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    FF43 said:

    LadyG said:

    Will 'X wasn't genocide cos it only killed 6 million of Y, and how do we know it was 6 million anyway' be Starkey's next schtick?

    Is Starkey gaslighting people who believe the Atlantic slave trade was one of the great crimes of the modern age?
    Yes, the whole statement is bizarre, quite apart from the hideous cuss word "damn".

    There is a good argument that slavery was and is a grotesque stain on human civilisation, but has never been a genocide, as such: slaves have been taken from all human races, by all other human races. But he makes it in the most slapdash and incoherent way.

    Did he have a stiff pre-lunch lockdown gin and tonic?

    I think a slave trade that lead to millions, maybe tens of millions, of deaths of Africans, can reasonably be described as a genocide
    No. A genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large group of people from one ethnic group, or an attempt to kill them all".

    Slavery was never that. It was explicitly not that: they wanted the slaves alive so they could work. The many, many deaths were an unfortunate loss of valuable goods.

    I am not in any way diminishing the horror of slavery. There is an argument to say that slavery is the greatest crime humans have done to other humans, taken in toto. Hundreds of millions of people have been slaved over the centuries.

    But genocide is an important and powerful word and we shouldn't weaken it by using it too liberally.
    The fact people survived isn't relevant to the question. That's a hole Starkey has fallen into. The question is whether the killing on a mass scale of a people of targeted ethnicity is sufficient to be deemed genocide, or whether there needs to be a deliberate intention to eliminate a race. Problem is the moral distinctions aren't clear. So Nazi concentration camps with gas chambers is genocide; without gas chambers it isn't. Not sure about the usefulness of that distinction.
    I thought it was quite clear that the Nazis were engaged in genocide before the gas chambers - they had formed death squads to eliminate Jews, they were meticulous about counting Jews in territory they conquered for the purpose of eliminating them, etc.

    The gas chambers came later because they were more efficient at killing large numbers than using bullets and firing squads. This is a difference in degree, but intent.
    The German economy of 1930s was a slave economy. The concentration camps were a key part of that. The government was completely indifferent to who survived and who didn't - plenty more where they came from. But they did need those people to survive for a while to be productive. In that sense no different from the owners and traders of the UK slave trade.
    Yes, but as has been pointed out, that was a means to an end, which was race destruction.

    The slave trade is of a different nature, as its victims were viewed as tradeable assets. Where it shades into genocide is that from the point of view of the slaver, the destruction of its victims through overwork was a benefit, since it created additional demand - and the more brutal forms of plantation slavery did just that.
    I studied Germany in WW2 a bit as part of my undergraduate degree - but from an economics standpoint.

    As I seem to recall, the policy against Jews was indeed one of destruction, not slavery evolving into destruction. I seem to remember a journal by Himmler, actively regretting that they had not seen the Jews as a source of labour (as Germany's lack of human resource as the war progressed became a bigger and bigger problem), rather than a problem to be 'solved'. Enslavement would have been quite literally 'the lesser of two evils', as it would have entailed keeping the Jewish population alive and healthy enough to work. But the Nazi's very pernicious brand of wickedness prevented that from happening.
    In his book on WW2 Max Hastings also takes the view that it would have made much more sense economically to enlist the Jews rather than try to eradicate them, which was an expensive as well as inhumane business.
    Nazis weren't big on sense. Economic or otherwise.
    It was one of their defining features :)
    Of course the (further) tragedy of it was that plenty of Jews had fought in WWI for Germany and hence thought themselves as German as Bratwurst (is that from Austria?).

    It is one of the reasons why many British Jews were so concerned at Jezza. No matter how embedded they are in British society, when politicians talk about Jews not understanding British irony...they worry.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881
    It’ll be fun if it’s like that all weekend!
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    LadyG said:

    How the F has Ghislaine Maxwell been hiding in plain sight in New Hampshire all this time??

    Curiouser and curiouser.

    It might be small state but it's mountainous and densely wooded. There was a commuter jet went down in NH back in the 90s and it took three years to find it.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,540

    You do realize that you would have frotted yourself senseless by following the polls for 4 and a half years of the Miliband leadership, only to see him go down in flames and the Tories win a majority in 2015? Not to mention your absolute certainty that Corbynite Labour was guaranteed victory from 2017 to 2019, which worked out ... how, exactly?

    Roy Jenkins famously compared Tony Blair's meticulous caution and humility in the run-up to 1997 to an elderly butler carrying a priceless Ming vase across a polished marble floor. You're racing it round the Indianapolis Speedway without a seatbelt...

    When will you learn?
    Not often I agree with you, but I do on these polls - nothing to get excited about for years yet, and could go either way.

    However, I think if Starmer does get ahead in 2023/24, he'll be just as cautious as Blair was to not drop that Ming vase.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,672

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
    Yeah, but.

    Have you ever talked to an elk, though?

    They look all majestic and peaceful as they canter through the birch forests of Oregon, but give them a few beers, and out it comes, right on cue. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the works. Hideous. They also think coyotes are intrinsically lazy.
    Elk also think they've got the right to poop anywhere they please. AND think nothing of wrecking your new car by jumping into the road anytime they get the notion.

    And ladies, IF you've ever been offended/insulted by some yob shouting "Look at the rack on that babe!" well, you know who is REALLY to blame.
    That whole "First they came for Thomas Jefferson" thing?

    I didn't know we'd get to this bit: "Then they came for the elks"
    Personally think elk are egotistical show-offs. Much prefer moose, most likely because of early brainwashing of my tender (if that's the right word) mind by the great "Rocky and Bullwinkle Show" co-staring Bullwinkle J. Moose the pride of Frostbite Falls, Minnesota.
    Just to check, please, are 'elk' the same species as European Red Deer? I'm getting confused, as I am under the impression we in NW Europe call moose 'elk' ...
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    Mr. Sandpit, it was a few days ago but when I checked the forecast it was looking dry and hot on race day.
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:

    The statue-topplers in Portland, Oregon, have now burned down that hideous, racist statue of.... < checks notes >... an elk

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278592095222067201?s=20


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_(sculpture)

    Stupid cultural vandals are stupid.
    Yeah, but.

    Have you ever talked to an elk, though?

    They look all majestic and peaceful as they canter through the birch forests of Oregon, but give them a few beers, and out it comes, right on cue. Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, the works. Hideous. They also think coyotes are intrinsically lazy.
    Elk also think they've got the right to poop anywhere they please. AND think nothing of wrecking your new car by jumping into the road anytime they get the notion.

    And ladies, IF you've ever been offended/insulted by some yob shouting "Look at the rack on that babe!" well, you know who is REALLY to blame.
    "Elk" is a colonizer word The decolonization word is "moose".
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
    It will never happen.
    Let's put it this way, if the US won't extradite the wife of a minor spy then the UK won't give up the favourite son of our beloved head of state.
    But Andrew might have to avoid the States from now on.
    Maxwell has surely been getting her black book and diaries up to date, and is going to sing like the proverbial canary if she can’t be ‘suicided’ first? She knows pretty much everyone in American high society.

    Yeah, Andrew won’t be travelling much any more, certainly not to anywhere with a US extradition treaty in place. UK won’t send him across the pond for obvious reasons, but how we reply to a formal request could be a test of diplomacy.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,612
  • Options
    sladeslade Posts: 1,930
    Just discovered that SeanT's grandfather knew LLoyd George. He stood as a Liberal candidate in 1918 and used to travel into London with LG. Lloyd George also signed a letter to The Times asking for a memorial to his son Edward Thomas for his services to poetry.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,961
    I think I'm going to skip traveling until a vaccine.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,553
    rpjs said:

    LadyG said:

    How the F has Ghislaine Maxwell been hiding in plain sight in New Hampshire all this time??

    Curiouser and curiouser.

    It might be small state but it's mountainous and densely wooded. There was a commuter jet went down in NH back in the 90s and it took three years to find it.
    She was arrested in Bedford NH which is NOT in the backwoods but rather in southern part of the state, an outer exurb of Boston.

    Sounds like she was hiding out, but that her cover got blown. Perhaps she now wishes she'd taken a one-way boat ride just like dear old daddy.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,807

    You do realize that you would have frotted yourself senseless by following the polls for 4 and a half years of the Miliband leadership, only to see him go down in flames and the Tories win a majority in 2015? Not to mention your absolute certainty that Corbynite Labour was guaranteed victory from 2017 to 2019, which worked out ... how, exactly?

    Roy Jenkins famously compared Tony Blair's meticulous caution and humility in the run-up to 1997 to an elderly butler carrying a priceless Ming vase across a polished marble floor. You're racing it round the Indianapolis Speedway without a seatbelt...

    When will you learn?
    I never expected confidence in the Government to decline so markedly in such a short time.

    I did expect post-EU transition cross over at the end of next year, but it could come sooner.

    We still have the post-Covid economic drag to come. Life is going to get tough for the Conservatives, I suspect quite soon.

    I am hoping for no second wave and Johnson to get his act together, but I am not holding my breath for either.
    I reckon crossover October/November, Labour go into the locals next May with a 4-6 point lead, but slightly underachieve that on NEV.

    I don't think my voting patterns over the last few years sit me neatly in any grouping, but having not voted Labour for 5 years now, after 16 years of voting almost exclusively for them, I have other homes for different types of elections. If I don't need to bolster Starmer, I could see my next Labour vote being in 2024.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282
    edited July 2020

    rpjs said:

    LadyG said:

    How the F has Ghislaine Maxwell been hiding in plain sight in New Hampshire all this time??

    Curiouser and curiouser.

    It might be small state but it's mountainous and densely wooded. There was a commuter jet went down in NH back in the 90s and it took three years to find it.
    She was arrested in Bedford NH which is NOT in the backwoods but rather in southern part of the state, an outer exurb of Boston.

    Sounds like she was hiding out, but that her cover got blown. Perhaps she now wishes she'd taken a one-way boat ride just like dear old daddy.
    OBL don't forget was hiding in Abbottabad. Not deep in the Hindu Kush.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,612
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    Sandpit said:

    It’ll be fun if it’s like that all weekend!
    Looking forward to this F1 season. I have a hunch that Vettel might surprise on the upside.

    Although my hunches on F1 are really just hunches.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,538
    A good thread on the immune response to Covid (and which has various links to informative papers):

    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1278400526716211200
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881
    The airlines are slowly going through a long list of reasons not to just get rid of the middle seats. I don’t know anyone who’s going to fly economy until they do, irrespective of the price of the ticket.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,538
    Death rates creeping up in the US:

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1278543966472994818
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,976
    edited July 2020
    Mr. kinabalu, possible, but there was a recent news report that Ferrari have shocked no-one by having design flaws.

    Speaking of flaws and nobody being shocked, seems lootboxes might be treated as gambling, which seems fair enough:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53253195

    Edited extra bit: and with that, I must be off.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,399
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MrEd said:

    US stock markets poised for a strong open after US jobs data looked better than expected.

    Fantastic for my oil investments.
    Maybe not so good for Biden investments though
    Sounding a bit like a Trumpster there, @contrarian :)
    Not really a supporter, just putting the other side of the argument. As usual!
    C'mon. You strongly want Trump to beat Biden. You all but wear a tee shirt saying so. But I have not heard you talk much about the betting on it, so I'm curious about that aspect. Have you backed him to win too?
    I wouldn't dream of backing Trump, because I have no idea who will win, and so I wouldn't have the courage of my convictions. But I wouldn't mind if he won. I can readily see how ghastly he is. I can see how an American who was very conscious of how America is perceived abroad would fervently wish him gone. But my feelings on the subject are ambivalent. For a few reasons, but firstly and foremostly because for whatever reason (quite possibly because he is in hock to foreign powers, who knows), Trump has not started World War III. Hillary would have. We could, in 2020, have been fighting a disease, and fighting each other - thank the heavens we are only doing one.

    Secondly because I think with 'America first', Trump is only crudely re-expressing America's consistent foreign policy, from the declaration of independence, until today. Others may be desperate to put the lipstick back on the pig, but I can't get excited about that.
    Well if you genuinely hold the firm view that Hillary Clinton as POTUS would have started World War III, it makes perfect sense to have wanted Trump to win in 2016. I would have been rooting for him too if I'd thought that.

    But that was then, this is now. It only holds again this time if you think Sleepy Joe is also hot to trot for some World War III. Which seems a bit far-fetched.

    As to your second reason. OK, so you'd rather a pig go "au naturel" than make a bit of an effort. I can't see any upside at all to that.
    I don't believe Joe Biden is as warlike in character than Hillary, no, and that is a plus. But in Biden, you have someone who might be a bit of an Obama - reluctant to appear to be blood drenched (which is more than can be said for many) but unlikely to really kick hard against war if being dragged toward it. Trump on the other hand, whether it is because Putin has his balls in a jar, or whether he's secretly just a big ole softy, is actively against it, and the proof of that particular pudding has already been in the eating. So he still wins that top-trumps competition as far as I am concerned.

    With your second point, like I said, the merit of the porcine beautification is all for a domestic audience. I can see why they would want a more Presidential President. For a foreign country, the value of a pig being a pig has already been felt. By virtue of Trump, Britain has been forced to develop a semblance of independence from the US that we have not had for decades. It's just a shame we've done that because America has an unsuitable and unpredictable leader, rather than why we should have - because they're a foreign power.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,273
    Pro_Rata said:

    You do realize that you would have frotted yourself senseless by following the polls for 4 and a half years of the Miliband leadership, only to see him go down in flames and the Tories win a majority in 2015? Not to mention your absolute certainty that Corbynite Labour was guaranteed victory from 2017 to 2019, which worked out ... how, exactly?

    Roy Jenkins famously compared Tony Blair's meticulous caution and humility in the run-up to 1997 to an elderly butler carrying a priceless Ming vase across a polished marble floor. You're racing it round the Indianapolis Speedway without a seatbelt...

    When will you learn?
    I never expected confidence in the Government to decline so markedly in such a short time.

    I did expect post-EU transition cross over at the end of next year, but it could come sooner.

    We still have the post-Covid economic drag to come. Life is going to get tough for the Conservatives, I suspect quite soon.

    I am hoping for no second wave and Johnson to get his act together, but I am not holding my breath for either.
    I reckon crossover October/November, Labour go into the locals next May with a 4-6 point lead, but slightly underachieve that on NEV.

    I don't think my voting patterns over the last few years sit me neatly in any grouping, but having not voted Labour for 5 years now, after 16 years of voting almost exclusively for them, I have other homes for different types of elections. If I don't need to bolster Starmer, I could see my next Labour vote being in 2024.
    Crossover could come at anytime and I fear for CHB if it does as he is so excitable poll by poll

    Personally, I cannot even think of how this will pan out over the coming months and even whether Boris will be in Office this time next year. There are simply too many variables, but I really want HMG to succeed, not for Boris, but for everyone who is living a nightmare of fear and insecurity that is presently without an end date
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,823

    LadyG - I'm not sure that's true. The Nazis really did consider shipping all the Jews to Madagascar, for instance. Or Siberia.

    What Hitler wanted, at first, was a Europe that was "Judenrein" - "free of Jews". This didn't necessarily mean killing them all, just moving them far far away.

    It was at the Wannsee Conference that this policy crystallised into the Final Solution.

    Temporary expedients. Mein Kampf is pretty clear: earth would be a better place without the Jews. Only one logical outcome. Might take a while but in the end - the Final Solution.



    Mass killing had certainly commenced long before mass gassing.

    Jews were being shot in large numbers in Poland from 1939 onwards, and then from June 1941, in the Baltic States and the Soviet Union. At the same time, Jews were being deported from occupied Europe and those parts of Poland that were to be incorporated into the Reich to the General Government of Poland. Hans Frank and his people were complaining about having to feed and house them, as well as Poles who were deemed unsuitable for Germanisation. There was pressure from the top, and pressure from below, to finalise the "Jewish problem". The participants at Wannsee were all agreed that the Jews had to go, but there was some debate about the method. There was also debate about the fate of part-Jews, and Jews who were married to non-Jewish German women.

    There was a second holocaust, related to the first, namely GeneralPlan Ost. There was broad agreement among the Nazis that the Slavs had to be starved or enslaved, and their upper and middle classes liquidated. But, there was considerable argument as to who was a Slav, and who had sufficiently valuable Aryan blood to be deemed suitable for "Germanisation.". Albert Foster, Gauleiter of West Prussia, was a "liberal" who took the view that virtually all Poles in his area should be treated as ethnically German. Artur Greiser expelled the lot to the General Government. The view was that most Estonians and Latvians and around half of Lithuanians could be Germanised. As with the Jewish holocaust, the arguments were about details, rather than principles.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881

    Mr. Sandpit, it was a few days ago but when I checked the forecast it was looking dry and hot on race day.

    The track is in the mountains, like Spa in Belgium, it can have its own weather system.

    One variable with all the schedule changes, is that many places are going to have their race outside the usual season. Barcelona, for example, is likely to be scorching hot, and as we move into the autumn there’s likely to be some wet weather around too.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,890
    Sandpit said:

    The airlines are slowly going through a long list of reasons not to just get rid of the middle seats. I don’t know anyone who’s going to fly economy until they do, irrespective of the price of the ticket.
    Mum, dad and child might prefer sitting in as 3 rather than one of them having to sit next to a stranger.
  • Options
    StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Sandpit said:

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
    It will never happen.
    Let's put it this way, if the US won't extradite the wife of a minor spy then the UK won't give up the favourite son of our beloved head of state.
    But Andrew might have to avoid the States from now on.
    Maxwell has surely been getting her black book and diaries up to date, and is going to sing like the proverbial canary if she can’t be ‘suicided’ first? She knows pretty much everyone in American high society.

    Yeah, Andrew won’t be travelling much any more, certainly not to anywhere with a US extradition treaty in place. UK won’t send him across the pond for obvious reasons, but how we reply to a formal request could be a test of diplomacy.
    Yeah, there's going to be a lot of people with a lot more power, influence, and money than Prince Andrew who she has info on. One way or another it'll be made sure that the damage is prevented, or contained to some people who aren't part of the in-group.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,952
    We called them moose in Canada. The thing on fire is a moose. Elk is the European word for the same species.
    You're welcome.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881
    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    It’ll be fun if it’s like that all weekend!
    Looking forward to this F1 season. I have a hunch that Vettel might surprise on the upside.

    Although my hunches on F1 are really just hunches.
    I might be inclined to agree when it comes to relative performance vs his team mate. In absolute terms though, it looks like Ferrari have built a total pig of a car.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,890

    You do realize that you would have frotted yourself senseless by following the polls for 4 and a half years of the Miliband leadership, only to see him go down in flames and the Tories win a majority in 2015? Not to mention your absolute certainty that Corbynite Labour was guaranteed victory from 2017 to 2019, which worked out ... how, exactly?

    Roy Jenkins famously compared Tony Blair's meticulous caution and humility in the run-up to 1997 to an elderly butler carrying a priceless Ming vase across a polished marble floor. You're racing it round the Indianapolis Speedway without a seatbelt...

    When will you learn?
    He was a butler who also taught the kids not to run around while he was carrying that Ming Vase.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,538
    slade said:

    Just discovered that SeanT's grandfather knew LLoyd George. He stood as a Liberal candidate in 1918 and used to travel into London with LG. Lloyd George also signed a letter to The Times asking for a memorial to his son Edward Thomas for his services to poetry.

    Yes. I remember Adlestrop—
    The name, because one afternoon
    Of heat the express-train drew up there
    Unwontedly. It was late June.

    The steam hissed. Someone cleared his throat.
    No one left and no one came
    On the bare platform. What I saw
    Was Adlestrop—only the name

    And willows, willow-herb, and grass,
    And meadowsweet, and haycocks dry,
    No whit less still and lonely fair
    Than the high cloudlets in the sky.

    And for that minute a blackbird sang
    Close by, and round him, mistier,
    Farther and farther, all the birds
    Of Oxfordshire and Gloucestershire.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,399

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:
    That’s an example of a good political cartoon compared to the rubbish you usually post
    The cringeing obsession of remoaners with how we're perceived abroad is something akin to a mental disorder. We voted for Brexit to be an independent trading nation, with a democratically elected Government setting our own laws. I would be surprised if that rather humble aim did not eventually result in grudging respect in the counsels of the world, but if it results in interminable attempts at levity, that's fine too, I really couldn't give a toss, and neither should anyone else.
    Speaking as someone who spends quite a lot of time talking to assorted foreigners in the fields of finance, economics and public policy, that's really not my experience. They all think we're bonkers and have an inflated idea of the UK's international importance.
    The only exceptions are other Europeans who hate the EU and hope Brexit might hasten its demise.
    I did say eventual. And in the meantime, it is mad to care, and if we care, to cultivate and brood on those feelings. I'm glad to have provided New Zealanders with a laugh - I am sure there are considerably more though who are genuinely looking forward to being our 'chums' - the loss of so much of their trade to Britain when we joined the EEC was devastating for their economy.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,538
    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    It’ll be fun if it’s like that all weekend!
    Looking forward to this F1 season. I have a hunch that Vettel might surprise on the upside.

    Although my hunches on F1 are really just hunches.
    Ferrari have already said their car is going to be off the pace at the first few races, so I wouldn't get your hopes up too much.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,823
    WRT the polls, most governments would be delighted to have the current government's ratings, eight months after the general election. I agree with Mrs. T, that you're doing something wrong if you aren't 10% behind by mid-term.

    Labour *ought* to be doing extremely well in next year's local elections, and should be worried if they do not. It was a sign of how badly the party was viewed that they actually went backwards in local elections from 2016-19.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,282

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:
    That’s an example of a good political cartoon compared to the rubbish you usually post
    The cringeing obsession of remoaners with how we're perceived abroad is something akin to a mental disorder. We voted for Brexit to be an independent trading nation, with a democratically elected Government setting our own laws. I would be surprised if that rather humble aim did not eventually result in grudging respect in the counsels of the world, but if it results in interminable attempts at levity, that's fine too, I really couldn't give a toss, and neither should anyone else.
    Speaking as someone who spends quite a lot of time talking to assorted foreigners in the fields of finance, economics and public policy, that's really not my experience. They all think we're bonkers and have an inflated idea of the UK's international importance.
    The only exceptions are other Europeans who hate the EU and hope Brexit might hasten its demise.
    I did say eventual. And in the meantime, it is mad to care, and if we care, to cultivate and brood on those feelings. I'm glad to have provided New Zealanders with a laugh - I am sure there are considerably more though who are genuinely looking forward to being our 'chums' - the loss of so much of their trade to Britain when we joined the EEC was devastating for their economy.
    No chums, remember, only interests. And the RoW will see us as a potentially weaker negotiating partner now. Certainly they will if they take notice of Boris' caving to date.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,171

    I believe we will see 40 Tory/40 Lab soon.

    Yep, but what will that mean? Are you old enough to remember the eighties? The alliance? I cannot understand your persistent fixation with opinion polls where the next election is probably 3 years and 9 months distant, and the government has an 80 seat majority...
    I don't have much of a life
    fair enough!
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,881
    eristdoof said:

    Sandpit said:

    The airlines are slowly going through a long list of reasons not to just get rid of the middle seats. I don’t know anyone who’s going to fly economy until they do, irrespective of the price of the ticket.
    Mum, dad and child might prefer sitting in as 3 rather than one of them having to sit next to a stranger.
    If someone wants a middle seat then fine, but the vast majority of people are going to want an empty seat next to them for as long as there’s a nasty virus going round.

    There’s been a few passenger surveys about processes and disruption, and that’s the only thing that people have a strong opinion on - they’ll happily pay more to not sit next to a stranger. Most people intending to travel soon are not going on holiday, they’re travelling because they need to.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    dixiedean said:

    We called them moose in Canada. The thing on fire is a moose. Elk is the European word for the same species.
    You're welcome.

    And US elk = UK red deer.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    It’ll be fun if it’s like that all weekend!
    Looking forward to this F1 season. I have a hunch that Vettel might surprise on the upside.

    Although my hunches on F1 are really just hunches.
    I might be inclined to agree when it comes to relative performance vs his team mate. In absolute terms though, it looks like Ferrari have built a total pig of a car.
    Yes I meant against Leclerc. Think I'll bet that way for small sums.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,052

    Sandpit said:

    LadyG said:

    LadyG said:
    Her or Prince Andrew?
    Yes, this is not good news for our dear Prince A.

    They won't be able to get away with another "hey, look, squirrel, oh she's committed suicide, never mind", so presumably she will go to trial.

    That will be explosive, unless she does some plea bargain.
    Do you think that it will come to this - the UK extraditing HRH Prince Arsehole to face his American accusers? A prince of the blood? Mama must be so proud!
    It will never happen.
    Let's put it this way, if the US won't extradite the wife of a minor spy then the UK won't give up the favourite son of our beloved head of state.
    But Andrew might have to avoid the States from now on.
    Maxwell has surely been getting her black book and diaries up to date, and is going to sing like the proverbial canary if she can’t be ‘suicided’ first? She knows pretty much everyone in American high society.

    Yeah, Andrew won’t be travelling much any more, certainly not to anywhere with a US extradition treaty in place. UK won’t send him across the pond for obvious reasons, but how we reply to a formal request could be a test of diplomacy.
    Yeah, there's going to be a lot of people with a lot more power, influence, and money than Prince Andrew who she has info on. One way or another it'll be made sure that the damage is prevented, or contained to some people who aren't part of the in-group.
    https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1278704012452343810
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,183
    edited July 2020
    The PPP poll of Texas is interesting. Biden is +2, but the Republican Senator Cornyn is +7. So the Republican Senator outpolls Trump by 9 points.

    We might see Republican Senators ditch support for Trump as the GOP try to hang onto the Senate. That's probably a better outcome for them than a Trump victory.
  • Options
    brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    edited July 2020
    dixiedean said:

    We called them moose in Canada. The thing on fire is a moose. Elk is the European word for the same species.
    You're welcome.

    *PB pedantry mode engaged*

    The statue is an Elk (Cervus), not a Moose (Alces) which can also be called an Elk in British English.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,890
    Scott_xP said:
    It is only one state poll I know, but Texas should not be anywhere near turning Dem. I remember in 2008 McCain was forced to start campaigning in the "leaning republican" states to prevent them from going Blue diverting considerable resources away from the battleground states.

    If Trump is going to have to fight to just keep Texas, he's going to have huge problems where it really matters in Pa and Fl
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,399
    TOPPING said:

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:
    That’s an example of a good political cartoon compared to the rubbish you usually post
    The cringeing obsession of remoaners with how we're perceived abroad is something akin to a mental disorder. We voted for Brexit to be an independent trading nation, with a democratically elected Government setting our own laws. I would be surprised if that rather humble aim did not eventually result in grudging respect in the counsels of the world, but if it results in interminable attempts at levity, that's fine too, I really couldn't give a toss, and neither should anyone else.
    Speaking as someone who spends quite a lot of time talking to assorted foreigners in the fields of finance, economics and public policy, that's really not my experience. They all think we're bonkers and have an inflated idea of the UK's international importance.
    The only exceptions are other Europeans who hate the EU and hope Brexit might hasten its demise.
    I did say eventual. And in the meantime, it is mad to care, and if we care, to cultivate and brood on those feelings. I'm glad to have provided New Zealanders with a laugh - I am sure there are considerably more though who are genuinely looking forward to being our 'chums' - the loss of so much of their trade to Britain when we joined the EEC was devastating for their economy.
    No chums, remember, only interests. And the RoW will see us as a potentially weaker negotiating partner now. Certainly they will if they take notice of Boris' caving to date.
    You must be more up on current affairs than I am, because I haven't noticed any caving. We will see when we get there.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,983

    The PPP poll of Texas is interesting. Biden is +2, but the RepublIcan Senator Cornyn is +7. So the RepublIcan Senator outpolls Trump by 9 points.

    We might see Republican Senators ditch support for Trump as the GOP try to hang onto the Senate. That's probably a better outcome for them than a Trump victory.

    In Montana though Trump is outpolling the GOP

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1278529818297012225?s=19

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1278523691350003714?s=19
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,187
    edited July 2020
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    It’ll be fun if it’s like that all weekend!
    Looking forward to this F1 season. I have a hunch that Vettel might surprise on the upside.

    Although my hunches on F1 are really just hunches.
    Ferrari have already said their car is going to be off the pace at the first few races, so I wouldn't get your hopes up too much.
    Have a soft spot for Vettel. Can't really explain why. I sense he might have now completed his journey from overrated to underrated - like Slade - and so he might give Leclerc a black eye albeit neither being contenders if it really is a rubbish car.

    But F1 is a sporting lifeline right now. Fresh narrative plus the lack of fans makes no difference to the TV experience of watching the actual race.

    No other sport can tick both those boxes - hence why I can't seem to get into any of them these days.
  • Options
    eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,890
    Sandpit said:

    eristdoof said:

    Sandpit said:

    The airlines are slowly going through a long list of reasons not to just get rid of the middle seats. I don’t know anyone who’s going to fly economy until they do, irrespective of the price of the ticket.
    Mum, dad and child might prefer sitting in as 3 rather than one of them having to sit next to a stranger.
    If someone wants a middle seat then fine, but the vast majority of people are going to want an empty seat next to them for as long as there’s a nasty virus going round.

    There’s been a few passenger surveys about processes and disruption, and that’s the only thing that people have a strong opinion on - they’ll happily pay more to not sit next to a stranger. Most people intending to travel soon are not going on holiday, they’re travelling because they need to.
    I was responding to "get rid of the middle seats".
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,308

    The PPP poll of Texas is interesting. Biden is +2, but the RepublIcan Senator Cornyn is +7. So the RepublIcan Senator outpolls Trump by 9 points.

    We might see Republican Senators ditch support for Trump as the GOP try to hang onto the Senate. That's probably a better outcome for them than a Trump victory.

    Might appear sound in theory but in practice ditching support for Trump means taking a big electoral hit. A lot of Trump supporters are not really Republicans and won't support the Republican nominee unless he/she supports Trump.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,183
    HYUFD said:

    The PPP poll of Texas is interesting. Biden is +2, but the RepublIcan Senator Cornyn is +7. So the RepublIcan Senator outpolls Trump by 9 points.

    We might see Republican Senators ditch support for Trump as the GOP try to hang onto the Senate. That's probably a better outcome for them than a Trump victory.

    In Montana though Trump is outpolling the GOP

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1278529818297012225?s=19

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1278523691350003714?s=19
    Yes - that's been the pattern for almost all the polls where you can do the comparison. Which is one reason the GOP has been in so much trouble, as they have somehow managed to have a worse reputation than the worst President in history.

    However, if that changes, then it provides an escape for the GOP and would likely mark the end of any hope of a recovery for Trump.
This discussion has been closed.