The key plank is that Trump is engaged in a battle with a network of Dem aligned pedophiles and any day now is going to expose the whole stinking lot of them.
The initial version is that Clinton and others were under secret arrest and had trackers attached to them.
This Secret arrest has morphed into new, different versions.
Of course, because the whole damn Q thing falsified itself within weeks of starting. At that point anyone even remotely rational should have figured out it was trolling/LARPing nonsense. That it gained legs just shows how bloody stupid huge numbers of people are, mind you the 9/11 "truthers" are just as bad so there was obviously already a gigantic lake of stupidity to be tapped.
On topic, what is to be made of Rishi Sunak? To this non-Conservative, there's more than a hint of John Major about him. He will be the perfect antidote to what has gone before just as Major was the perfect antidote to Thatcher.
Sunak seems an excellent manager and administrator - possibly as much in the detail as Gordon Brown in his way. Does that make him a Prime Minister? It won't stop him but rather like Major, Sunak will have the task of re-inventing a party which has been in power for a long period against an Opposition party growing in confidence and re-establishing its credentials as an alternative Government.
Major won in 1992 for many reasons but let's not forget his "victory" was bought at the cost of most of the pre-existing majority. He lost 40 seats, which Sunak can ill afford to repeat. Yet Starmer is no Kinnock and with the LDs always lurking to ambush a few seats, the possibility of another Hung Parliament after the next GE cannot be discounted.
You wouldn't choose a Sunak or a Major if you wanted a charismatic leader to take you back from Opposition to Government - they are men of and for Government, the proverbial "safe pair of hands" and ideal for good times against moderate opposition.
Catch them in a thoughtful moment and even the Conservatives on here will concede Blair in his pomp was a formidable political operator and he crushed Major - Starmer is no Kinnock but he is no Blair either.
History is rarely symmetrical but all Governments have a shelf life. After 13 years in office, the Conservatives in 1964 and Labour in 2010 ran out of road. Whether Covid will come to resemble the socio-cultural changes of the early 60s or the impact of the financial crash in 2008 in political terms is far from certain but it seems improbable there will be no lasting impact.
I think part of Sunak's attraction at the moment is that he is not Johnson.
I can see the Tories being severely damaged by Covid and Brexit, but then 2024 might be the election no one wants to win.
I can't wait until we have QAnon believers on here.
I'm sure we have QAnon believers on here. They just keep it quiet.
QAnon and BLM are a response to the natural human instinct to believe "the truth is in the middle".
It therefore makes sense to take the most extreme position possible because that moves the middle a little bit towards your side. It's why the DUP and the IRA destroyed the UUP and the SDLP - because both communities wanted to move the middle, and the best way to do that was to take the most extreme view possible.
Sadly, this means the death of nuance. Taking an extreme position makes it very hard to see anything of value in your political opponent's views. It makes empathy and compromise hard. It means stoking the up the very edges of society and making violence more likely.
I must have missed this but what is QAnon?
A substantial minority of Americans believe the "drops" of Q, who claims to be an intelligence officer in the US. He has spread stories that include:
- the idea that Hillary Clinton is running a paedophile network from a pizza parlor in DC (Pizzagate)
- the Idea that a video exists of Hillary Clinton (it's always her, isn't it?) Killing a baby, removing its face, and then wearing it. (Frazzledrip)
Assuming those allegations are true (which obviously they aren't), what exactly do QAnon supporters even want? A no deal Brexit perhaps?
Some of them believe that Trump is fighting a brave, and secret, war against the peados and their democratic enablers. So keeping Trump in there is vital.
Yes. Their man has proved to be every bit more venal, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent than even his most ardent detractors feared. So cognitive dissonance requires he must be waging some below the radar war against unspeakable evil. Otherwise they would have to accept they've been conned.
What I don't get with Q anon is what Trump is supposedly doing to defeat the satan worshipping paedos. Not much that I can see.
I can't wait until we have QAnon believers on here.
I'm sure we have QAnon believers on here. They just keep it quiet.
QAnon and BLM are a response to the natural human instinct to believe "the truth is in the middle".
It therefore makes sense to take the most extreme position possible because that moves the middle a little bit towards your side. It's why the DUP and the IRA destroyed the UUP and the SDLP - because both communities wanted to move the middle, and the best way to do that was to take the most extreme view possible.
Sadly, this means the death of nuance. Taking an extreme position makes it very hard to see anything of value in your political opponent's views. It makes empathy and compromise hard. It means stoking the up the very edges of society and making violence more likely.
I must have missed this but what is QAnon?
A substantial minority of Americans believe the "drops" of Q, who claims to be an intelligence officer in the US. He has spread stories that include:
- the idea that Hillary Clinton is running a paedophile network from a pizza parlor in DC (Pizzagate)
- the Idea that a video exists of Hillary Clinton (it's always her, isn't it?) Killing a baby, removing its face, and then wearing it. (Frazzledrip)
Assuming those allegations are true (which obviously they aren't), what exactly do QAnon supporters even want? A no deal Brexit perhaps?
Some of them believe that Trump is fighting a brave, and secret, war against the peados and their democratic enablers. So keeping Trump in there is vital.
Then just as we all thought they were completely off their rockers, up comes Jeffery Epstein and his private island harem of underage girls.
Our primitive brains are no match for the godlike technology that dominates and manipulates our lives. No wonder we’re losing our grip on the truth, says John Lanchester" (£)
I can't wait until we have QAnon believers on here.
I'm sure we have QAnon believers on here. They just keep it quiet.
QAnon and BLM are a response to the natural human instinct to believe "the truth is in the middle".
It therefore makes sense to take the most extreme position possible because that moves the middle a little bit towards your side. It's why the DUP and the IRA destroyed the UUP and the SDLP - because both communities wanted to move the middle, and the best way to do that was to take the most extreme view possible.
Sadly, this means the death of nuance. Taking an extreme position makes it very hard to see anything of value in your political opponent's views. It makes empathy and compromise hard. It means stoking the up the very edges of society and making violence more likely.
I must have missed this but what is QAnon?
A substantial minority of Americans believe the "drops" of Q, who claims to be an intelligence officer in the US. He has spread stories that include:
- the idea that Hillary Clinton is running a paedophile network from a pizza parlor in DC (Pizzagate)
- the Idea that a video exists of Hillary Clinton (it's always her, isn't it?) Killing a baby, removing its face, and then wearing it. (Frazzledrip)
Assuming those allegations are true (which obviously they aren't), what exactly do QAnon supporters even want? A no deal Brexit perhaps?
Some of them believe that Trump is fighting a brave, and secret, war against the peados and their democratic enablers. So keeping Trump in there is vital.
Yes. Their man has proved to be every bit more venal, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent than even his most ardent detractors feared. So cognitive dissonance requires he must be waging some below the radar war against unspeakable evil. Otherwise they would have to accept they've been conned.
What I don't get with Q anon is what Trump is supposedly doing to defeat the satan worshipping paedos. Not much that I can see.
Ha! That's what he WANTS you to think! Because...erm...Clinton, Soros, etc.
I can't wait until we have QAnon believers on here.
I'm sure we have QAnon believers on here. They just keep it quiet.
QAnon and BLM are a response to the natural human instinct to believe "the truth is in the middle".
It therefore makes sense to take the most extreme position possible because that moves the middle a little bit towards your side. It's why the DUP and the IRA destroyed the UUP and the SDLP - because both communities wanted to move the middle, and the best way to do that was to take the most extreme view possible.
Sadly, this means the death of nuance. Taking an extreme position makes it very hard to see anything of value in your political opponent's views. It makes empathy and compromise hard. It means stoking the up the very edges of society and making violence more likely.
I must have missed this but what is QAnon?
A substantial minority of Americans believe the "drops" of Q, who claims to be an intelligence officer in the US. He has spread stories that include:
- the idea that Hillary Clinton is running a paedophile network from a pizza parlor in DC (Pizzagate)
- the Idea that a video exists of Hillary Clinton (it's always her, isn't it?) Killing a baby, removing its face, and then wearing it. (Frazzledrip)
Assuming those allegations are true (which obviously they aren't), what exactly do QAnon supporters even want? A no deal Brexit perhaps?
Some of them believe that Trump is fighting a brave, and secret, war against the peados and their democratic enablers. So keeping Trump in there is vital.
Then just as we all thought they were completely off their rockers, up comes Jeffery Epstein and his private island harem of underage girls.
Hey. Great tip today. Thanks v much.
Confirms my view only ever to bet on sports when someone tells me to.
Then just as we all thought they were completely off their rockers, up comes Jeffery Epstein and his private island harem of underage girls.
Sure, and who is one of Epstein's co-accused? Donald Trump. So does that mean Donald is fighting a brave, and secret, war against himself?
And in case anyone has forgotten Trump is currently fighting giving a DNA sample in a defamation case that came about because of yet another rape accusation.
With Trump, the GOP, and his supporters it often comes back to projection.
A couple of new polls out in key swing states NBC/Marist .
Biden leads by 10 points 54 to 44 in Wisconsin and by 8 points 52 to 44 in Michigan
And not only is the SC nomination is firing up the Dems more than the GOP but that majority in each state say it should be up to the winner to nominate.
I'm not displeased with Mitch's actions on the SC, must say.
If I hadn't been burnt by assuming the attempt to unseat John Bercow from the speakership prior to the 2015 election was a sign the Cons thought it was going to be incredibly tight I would definitely be confidently stating that the GOP think they are in for a total an utter kicking based on their SC manoeuvres.
All politics is personal.
The impression that Cameron did not 'stand for anything' ... Even behind closed doors, he rarely seemed exercised by any single issue. (A confidant of Cameron's says the most animated he ever saw the Tory leader was 'in his dislike for John Bercow'.) Call Me Dave. The unauthorised biography of David Cameron.
Then just as we all thought they were completely off their rockers, up comes Jeffery Epstein and his private island harem of underage girls.
Sure, and who is one of Epstein's co-accused? Donald Trump. So does that mean Donald is fighting a brave, and secret, war against himself?
And in case anyone has forgotten Trump is currently fighting giving a DNA sample in a defamation case that came about because of yet another rape accusation.
With Trump, the GOP, and his supporters it often comes back to projection.
Trumps longstanding relationship with the paedophile Casablancas should raise a few eyebrows too!
I think this guy is starting with the wrong assumption that gigantic pharma companies will be happy to trash their reputations to help Trump claim victory in the vaccine race.
No, I think there’s a genuine concern over Pfizer. Their trial protocol includes an unusual three interim analyses, and it’s not impossible (particularly if you’ve taken notice of some if their statements) that they might go for a premature Emergency Use Authorisation. I may be doing them a disservice, but better safe than sorry. And given the state of the US administration, no one to be relied on there.
Biden leads 49-41 overall. With men it's tied at 45 and with women Biden leads by 16 so the swing to Biden among men is greater than the swing among women. Trump leads White voters 49-42 so that's a swing of 7% from 2016 but among Hispanics Biden leads 59-31 so a small 2% swing to Trump among that group. Apart from a 6% lead in the south, Trump trails Biden everywhere else.
By education, Trump has improved his position among those with a High School diploma or less - he won that group 51-45 in 2016 and now leads 52-38 so a 4% swing to the President but half those voting are graduates or have post-graduate education and Trump trails badly in that group.
The ABC News/Washington Post poll has Biden leading Trump 54-44 in a straight match but including Jorgensen and Hawkins Biden's lead falls to six with a 49-43 advantage. I can't reach the crosstabs so if anyone can shed any light on the detail that would be helpful. I assume the 10-point lead is a forced choice between Biden and Trump.
On to the plethora of state polling and NBC News/Marist has strong Biden leads in both Michigan and Wisconsin so I won't dwell on those.
YouGov has done three State polls for CBS News - in North Carolina, it's yet another TCTC poll with Biden up 48-46 and 4% still undecided among a poll of 1,213 Likely voters and an MoE of 3.6%. In Georgia, it's similar with Trump leading 47-46 and 5% still undecided on a poll of 1.164 Likely voters (MoE 3.3%). In South Carolina, which Trump won by 14 in 2016, he now leads by 52-42 so a better poll for the President with only a 2% swing against him and on that evidence South Carolina stays firmly in the Red camp but North Carolina is very much TCTC as is Georgia.
Rasmussen has conducted a poll for the Center for American Greatness whose partiality is fairly blatant:
Biden leads 47-46 among Likely voters and 49-48 after a degree of Leaning. The crosstabs are in spreadsheet form so at least you can view and analyse them and if you know more about the demographics of Nevada than I, you can judge as to whether the sampling is reasonable. Clinton won Nevada by 1.5 points last time.
Among the 90% White, Black and Hispanic parts of the sample, Biden leads by 2 points but a 20-point lead for Trump among the 10% "Other" cuts that right back - I'm not convinced.
Biden leads 49-41 overall. With men it's tied at 45 and with women Biden leads by 16 so the swing to Biden among men is greater than the swing among women. Trump leads White voters 49-42 so that's a swing of 7% from 2016 but among Hispanics Biden leads 59-31 so a small 2% swing to Trump among that group. Apart from a 6% lead in the south, Trump trails Biden everywhere else.
By education, Trump has improved his position among those with a High School diploma or less - he won that group 51-45 in 2016 and now leads 52-38 so a 4% swing to the President but half those voting are graduates or have post-graduate education and Trump trails badly in that group.
The ABC News/Washington Post poll has Biden leading Trump 54-44 in a straight match but including Jorgensen and Hawkins Biden's lead falls to six with a 49-43 advantage. I can't reach the crosstabs so if anyone can shed any light on the detail that would be helpful. I assume the 10-point lead is a forced choice between Biden and Trump.
On to the plethora of state polling and NBC News/Marist has strong Biden leads in both Michigan and Wisconsin so I won't dwell on those.
YouGov has done three State polls for CBS News - in North Carolina, it's yet another TCTC poll with Biden up 48-46 and 4% still undecided among a poll of 1,213 Likely voters and an MoE of 3.6%. In Georgia, it's similar with Trump leading 47-46 and 5% still undecided on a poll of 1.164 Likely voters (MoE 3.3%). In South Carolina, which Trump won by 14 in 2016, he now leads by 52-42 so a better poll for the President with only a 2% swing against him and on that evidence South Carolina stays firmly in the Red camp but North Carolina is very much TCTC as is Georgia.
Rasmussen has conducted a poll for the Center for American Greatness whose partiality is fairly blatant:
Biden leads 47-46 among Likely voters and 49-48 after a degree of Leaning. The crosstabs are in spreadsheet form so at least you can view and analyse them and if you know more about the demographics of Nevada than I, you can judge as to whether the sampling is reasonable. Clinton won Nevada by 1.5 points last time.
Among the 90% White, Black and Hispanic parts of the sample, Biden leads by 2 points but a 20-point lead for Trump among the 10% "Other" cuts that right back - I'm not convinced.
Thanks for this. For all the chaff being thrown about, this looks a decisive Biden victory and quite possibly in landslide territory.
My sell on Trump EV at 245 on Spreadex is looking good.
I can't wait until we have QAnon believers on here.
I'm sure we have QAnon believers on here. They just keep it quiet.
QAnon and BLM are a response to the natural human instinct to believe "the truth is in the middle".
It therefore makes sense to take the most extreme position possible because that moves the middle a little bit towards your side. It's why the DUP and the IRA destroyed the UUP and the SDLP - because both communities wanted to move the middle, and the best way to do that was to take the most extreme view possible.
Sadly, this means the death of nuance. Taking an extreme position makes it very hard to see anything of value in your political opponent's views. It makes empathy and compromise hard. It means stoking the up the very edges of society and making violence more likely.
I must have missed this but what is QAnon?
A substantial minority of Americans believe the "drops" of Q, who claims to be an intelligence officer in the US. He has spread stories that include:
- the idea that Hillary Clinton is running a paedophile network from a pizza parlor in DC (Pizzagate)
- the Idea that a video exists of Hillary Clinton (it's always her, isn't it?) Killing a baby, removing its face, and then wearing it. (Frazzledrip)
Assuming those allegations are true (which obviously they aren't), what exactly do QAnon supporters even want? A no deal Brexit perhaps?
Some of them believe that Trump is fighting a brave, and secret, war against the peados and their democratic enablers. So keeping Trump in there is vital.
Yes. Their man has proved to be every bit more venal, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent than even his most ardent detractors feared. So cognitive dissonance requires he must be waging some below the radar war against unspeakable evil. Otherwise they would have to accept they've been conned.
What I don't get with Q anon is what Trump is supposedly doing to defeat the satan worshipping paedos. Not much that I can see.
The one thing about a Secret War is it happens in secret.
I wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that SAGE wanted to stick the whole country into "Lockdown Lite" for two weeks (i.e. a bit like April, but with schools and non-essential shops also spared) but Sunak vetoed the plan by threatening to resign? Apparently the slightly stricter masking rules and the 10pm curfew that were eventually announced was the 'seen-to-be-doing-something' compromise that the Chancellor was willing to stomach.
The one thing about a Secret War is it happens in secret.
That's kind of the genius of QAnon.
When it first started Q was alluding to all kinds of imminent dramatic events, absolutely none of which happened. The "well it's secret" became the rationalisation for all the stuff that falsified the conspiracy. Of course now QAnon doesn't really mean anything other than "I'm a far-right nutcase", and even that is starting to change with left-wing Q supporters starting to turn up. I don't think there's really even any "Q" as such anymore, it's more like a brand for whatever conspiracy crap has been scraped from the bottom of the barrel today by the dozens of grifters peddling QAnon nonsense to make a buck.
I wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that SAGE wanted to stick the whole country into "Lockdown Lite" for two weeks (i.e. a bit like April, but with schools and non-essential shops also spared) but Sunak vetoed the plan by threatening to resign? Apparently the slightly stricter masking rules and the 10pm curfew that were eventually announced was the 'seen-to-be-doing-something' compromise that the Chancellor was willing to stomach.
Maybe, Rishi should have stood firm and only allowed the mask wearing. The 10pm closing time is a disaster.
Thanks for this. For all the chaff being thrown about, this looks a decisive Biden victory and quite possibly in landslide territory.
My sell on Trump EV at 245 on Spreadex is looking good.
Yes, but I wouldn't expect to make fortunes on it.
There's a lot of chatter on the pro-Trump media (such as the Center for American Greatness) about Trump picking up Black and Hispanic votes and it's true he's doing marginally better among Hispanic voters than in 2016 but his big problem is, surprisingly, white voters where a 21% advantage in 2016 is now 7% so that's a 7% swing to Biden among the group which supplies over 2/3 of the voters.
Trump is making small progress among minority voter blocs while he has lost more ground among the majority bloc. That may help him in Arizona, Florida, Nevada and perhaps Texas but not elsewhere. The other conundrum is the polls are of "Likely" voters - I suspect what we saw in 2016 was a number of Trump voters were never seen as they were not considered "Likely" while some other "Likely" Clinton voters stayed at home.
That might happen again and it may explain why Rasmussen/Trafalgar show such different results as they are actively trying to hunt down "shy Trump" voters - I don't know. I see mounting evidence for an 8-10% national lead for Biden and I see evidence the battleground has shifted away from the rustbelt states to places like Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, New Hampshire and Texas.
IF Biden wins Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and holds all of Clinton's 2016 states, he wins. Force me to make a forecast right now and I'm at 305-233 for Biden but that's only where I am now on what I'm seeing now - it's not a final prediction.
So much for Ed Davey then. Why bother having a leader if the members are going to hand them untenable policies. On of Starmer's big wins has been to accept "get brexit done" as a policy.
I wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that SAGE wanted to stick the whole country into "Lockdown Lite" for two weeks (i.e. a bit like April, but with schools and non-essential shops also spared) but Sunak vetoed the plan by threatening to resign? Apparently the slightly stricter masking rules and the 10pm curfew that were eventually announced was the 'seen-to-be-doing-something' compromise that the Chancellor was willing to stomach.
Maybe, Rishi should have stood firm and only allowed the mask wearing. The 10pm closing time is a disaster.
It could well be argued thus. It's unhelpful in quieter, leafier parts of the country but the pubs and restaurants will be hoping that most of the lost trade will be recovered by people simply visiting earlier. In the cities, on the other hand, where customers are more likely to be travelling in from further away... and then there's the madcap commotion of impromptu street parties when pissed revellers are all chucked out from everywhere at once at the stroke of ten.
But like I say, the pointless curfew has "must be seen to be doing something" written all over it. I don't know, given the suspicions I already harbour about Johnson perhaps the uselessness and likely counter-productivity of the measure is even deliberate? Failure equips him with an excuse to keep turning the screw.
This is sure to be entertaining. Persistently rubbish
I'm not exactly a staunch defender of this Government, BUT - are they now to be whined at for having *too much* medical PPE? Especially given the current atmosphere of panic about a possible explosion in hospitalisations? I mean, come on...
This is sure to be entertaining. Persistently rubbish
I'm not exactly a staunch defender of this Government, BUT - are they now to be whined at for having *too much* medical PPE? Especially given the current atmosphere of panic about a possible explosion in hospitalisations? I mean, come on...
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
I wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that SAGE wanted to stick the whole country into "Lockdown Lite" for two weeks (i.e. a bit like April, but with schools and non-essential shops also spared) but Sunak vetoed the plan by threatening to resign? Apparently the slightly stricter masking rules and the 10pm curfew that were eventually announced was the 'seen-to-be-doing-something' compromise that the Chancellor was willing to stomach.
Maybe, Rishi should have stood firm and only allowed the mask wearing. The 10pm closing time is a disaster.
It could well be argued thus. It's unhelpful in quieter, leafier parts of the country but the pubs and restaurants will be hoping that most of the lost trade will be recovered by people simply visiting earlier. In the cities, on the other hand, where customers are more likely to be travelling in from further away... and then there's the madcap commotion of impromptu street parties when pissed revellers are all chucked out from everywhere at once at the stroke of ten.
But like I say, the pointless curfew has "must be seen to be doing something" written all over it. I don't know, given the suspicions I already harbour about Johnson perhaps the uselessness and likely counter-productivity of the measure is even deliberate? Failure equips him with an excuse to keep turning the screw.
Yes the 10pm policy is a complete disaster and was probably thought up by someone who 'doesn't understand pubs', having been asked to come up with an idea to show that the government is 'doing something' about hospitality.
The impact is to make pubgoers act as if they are under 'time pressure' in the pub. This will include many who would typically leave around 10pm in any case and would have drank in a normal relaxed sensible manner but now almost have to time the point that each drink is ordered! The table service also doesn't help here either - if the pub is busy there is an implicit pressure to get served from 9.15 to be able to have 'one last drink' whereas with a sensible approach, one would just go up the bar, get the beer and get on with it sensibly.
A solution - allow 20 mins drinking up time ie Back to the 80s possibly with an extra 30s mins serving time, ie last orders 10.30 everyone out by 11?
I repost my favourite links of this week. I'd encourage people to scan down the article, it is more subtle than the old 'joke candidate wins election' story, the way this transexual, anarchist Satanist lays out her argument is very well done and clever, and I wonder whether she might even make a good elected Sheriff!
Which brings me to Dubai, who is clearly a Brexit believer, who might be tasked with selling Brexit in 2021/22, after it has all descended into a disaster, not even of ideology, but of chronic underrepreparation.
Sunak strikes me as a man who at least will have a clue of why he wanted Brexit in the first place, and it will be interesting to see if he can sell a long term vision from the ashes. I guess his ideas are somewhat Singapore-on-Thames in nature, but that in itself won't sell - the Red wall demands a workers' vision of Singapore-on-Trent to boot.
Perhaps a transexual 'f* the Police' Chief' may have lessons to offer for how, in extremis, Mr Yorkshire Tea will need to sell his vision.
So much for Ed Davey then. Why bother having a leader if the members are going to hand them untenable policies. On of Starmer's big wins has been to accept "get brexit done" as a policy.
Or - LDs never learn! Always a fringe party. They may as well have elected Layla.
I repost my favourite links of this week. I'd encourage people to scan down the article, it is more subtle than the old 'joke candidate wins election' story, the way this transexual, anarchist Satanist lays out her argument is very well done and clever, and I wonder whether she might even make a good elected Sheriff!
Which brings me to Dubai, who is clearly a Brexit believer, who might be tasked with selling Brexit in 2021/22, after it has all descended into a disaster, not even of ideology, but of chronic underrepreparation.
Sunak strikes me as a man who at least will have a clue of why he wanted Brexit in the first place, and it will be interesting to see if he can sell a long term vision from the ashes. I guess his ideas are somewhat Singapore-on-Thames in nature, but that in itself won't sell - the Red wall demands a workers' vision of Singapore-on-Trent to boot.
Perhaps a transexual 'f* the Police' Chief' may have lessons to offer for how, in extremis, Mr Yorkshire Tea will need to sell his vision.
So much for Ed Davey then. Why bother having a leader if the members are going to hand them untenable policies. On of Starmer's big wins has been to accept "get brexit done" as a policy.
They are not out to stop resolving the end of transition, brexit is done just the ongoing relationship to be resolved. They advocate a close relationship with the EU ongoing(sensible) and should the conditions ever occur that rejoining is an option, supported by a majority then that’s also realistic, it’s not fighting old battles, just because we have left doesn’t have to mean we can’t rejoin, time will tell. Not a disaster policy if you take the trouble to find out what it actually is and think about it.
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
Yes, I agree; it's nothing but an aspiration. Rather like Tories saying let's have really low tax rates (when the time is right) or Labour saying let's nationalise xyz (when the time is right). It would only be an error if it appeared as a key LD election pledge at next year's council elections or the 2024 GE.
I think this guy is starting with the wrong assumption that gigantic pharma companies will be happy to trash their reputations to help Trump claim victory in the vaccine race.
No, I think there’s a genuine concern over Pfizer. Their trial protocol includes an unusual three interim analyses, and it’s not impossible (particularly if you’ve taken notice of some if their statements) that they might go for a premature Emergency Use Authorisation. I may be doing them a disservice, but better safe than sorry. And given the state of the US administration, no one to be relied on there.
The biggest problem in that, is that the Trump administration is quite capable of apply *any* pressure, by any means they think they can get away with to bend things to their way of thinking.
If they think that forcing a company to release a semi-tested vaccine is in their interests, they will attempt to do so. By any means.
The alternative proposition - effectively rejoin asap - was defeated 331 to 1071. So from a LibDem perspective the outcome is a move toward realism. The final wording can be played long and, like Brown's tests for the Euro, might never happen. You can't blame them however for saying that the best position for the UK is to be back in the EU. If next year goes badly that view might be more widespread than it is now.
I wonder if there is any truth to the rumour that SAGE wanted to stick the whole country into "Lockdown Lite" for two weeks (i.e. a bit like April, but with schools and non-essential shops also spared) but Sunak vetoed the plan by threatening to resign? Apparently the slightly stricter masking rules and the 10pm curfew that were eventually announced was the 'seen-to-be-doing-something' compromise that the Chancellor was willing to stomach.
Maybe, Rishi should have stood firm and only allowed the mask wearing. The 10pm closing time is a disaster.
It could well be argued thus. It's unhelpful in quieter, leafier parts of the country but the pubs and restaurants will be hoping that most of the lost trade will be recovered by people simply visiting earlier. In the cities, on the other hand, where customers are more likely to be travelling in from further away... and then there's the madcap commotion of impromptu street parties when pissed revellers are all chucked out from everywhere at once at the stroke of ten.
But like I say, the pointless curfew has "must be seen to be doing something" written all over it. I don't know, given the suspicions I already harbour about Johnson perhaps the uselessness and likely counter-productivity of the measure is even deliberate? Failure equips him with an excuse to keep turning the screw.
Yes the 10pm policy is a complete disaster and was probably thought up by someone who 'doesn't understand pubs', having been asked to come up with an idea to show that the government is 'doing something' about hospitality.
The impact is to make pubgoers act as if they are under 'time pressure' in the pub. This will include many who would typically leave around 10pm in any case and would have drank in a normal relaxed sensible manner but now almost have to time the point that each drink is ordered! The table service also doesn't help here either - if the pub is busy there is an implicit pressure to get served from 9.15 to be able to have 'one last drink' whereas with a sensible approach, one would just go up the bar, get the beer and get on with it sensibly.
A solution - allow 20 mins drinking up time ie Back to the 80s possibly with an extra 30s mins serving time, ie last orders 10.30 everyone out by 11?
Then they would pile out on the street at 11 having come out an hour later. Stay open till one no admittance after 12 police the streets, ban drinking on public roads, mandate mask usage and fine those who don’t comply with the rules.
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
The problem for them is that almost no attention is paid to the LDs, so to the extent that the policy is noticed at all none of these sundry caveats will be heard. All that Joe Average is going to get from this is "Liberal Democrats want to go back into EU." That's wonderful news for the fraction of the Continuity Remain tendency that hasn't already thrown in the towel in despair; to everybody else it sounds like dog-with-a-bone fanaticism.
One might even go so far as to say that Healey's First Law of Holes applies in this case. The party has already disappeared several hundred miles in the direction of the Earth's core, so that now it finds itself invisible and, when the faint echo of its voice is occasionally heard, the only word that can be made out is "Europe." They need to start climbing out again - this entails urgently finding something else to shout about and desisting from further caterwauling about bloody Brexit.
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
The problem for them is that almost no attention is paid to the LDs, so to the extent that the policy is noticed at all none of these sundry caveats will be heard. All that Joe Average is going to get from this is "Liberal Democrats want to go back into EU." That's wonderful news for the fraction of the Continuity Remain tendency that hasn't already thrown in the towel in despair; to everybody else it sounds like dog-with-a-bone fanaticism.
One might even go so far as to say that Healey's First Law of Holes applies in this case. The party has already disappeared several hundred miles in the direction of the Earth's core, so that now it finds itself invisible and, when the faint echo of its voice is occasionally heard, the only word that can be made out is "Europe." They need to start climbing out again - this entails urgently finding something else to shout about and desisting from further caterwauling about bloody Brexit.
Brexit is nowhere near done, and on January 1st we will either have caterwauling about the can being kicked yet again, or caterwauling about the inevitable disruption.
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
The problem for them is that almost no attention is paid to the LDs, so to the extent that the policy is noticed at all none of these sundry caveats will be heard. All that Joe Average is going to get from this is "Liberal Democrats want to go back into EU." That's wonderful news for the fraction of the Continuity Remain tendency that hasn't already thrown in the towel in despair; to everybody else it sounds like dog-with-a-bone fanaticism.
One might even go so far as to say that Healey's First Law of Holes applies in this case. The party has already disappeared several hundred miles in the direction of the Earth's core, so that now it finds itself invisible and, when the faint echo of its voice is occasionally heard, the only word that can be made out is "Europe." They need to start climbing out again - this entails urgently finding something else to shout about and desisting from further caterwauling about bloody Brexit.
Brexit is nowhere near done, and on January 1st we will either have caterwauling about the can being kicked yet again, or caterwauling about the inevitable disruption.
1. Covid dominates everything 2. The public was already sick to death of hearing about Brexit even before Covid started
There's no mileage in boring on endlessly about Brexit for a serious political party, which is why Labour have desisted. That goes double for any noises about rejoining: CHB is right. It loses you more voters (or, in the case of a shrunken party like the Lib Dems, potential voters) than it gains.
What is the actual real world state by state polling on abortion in the US? Is it one of those issues which looks on the face of it like a Republican gain because (outside of the really red states) most people still consider it settled law (or perhaps take issue with relative minor aspects of Roe vs Wade) but if it became a live issue in the Supreme Court would suddenly become a big negative when the implications were fully appreciated?
Another way of saying it matters more to the Republican base than the Democrat one - but this could rapidly change.
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
The problem for them is that almost no attention is paid to the LDs, so to the extent that the policy is noticed at all none of these sundry caveats will be heard. All that Joe Average is going to get from this is "Liberal Democrats want to go back into EU." That's wonderful news for the fraction of the Continuity Remain tendency that hasn't already thrown in the towel in despair; to everybody else it sounds like dog-with-a-bone fanaticism.
One might even go so far as to say that Healey's First Law of Holes applies in this case. The party has already disappeared several hundred miles in the direction of the Earth's core, so that now it finds itself invisible and, when the faint echo of its voice is occasionally heard, the only word that can be made out is "Europe." They need to start climbing out again - this entails urgently finding something else to shout about and desisting from further caterwauling about bloody Brexit.
Brexit is nowhere near done, and on January 1st we will either have caterwauling about the can being kicked yet again, or caterwauling about the inevitable disruption.
1. Covid dominates everything 2. The public was already sick to death of hearing about Brexit even before Covid started
There's no mileage in boring on endlessly about Brexit for a serious political party, which is why Labour have desisted. That goes double for any noises about rejoining: CHB is right. It loses you more voters (or, in the case of a shrunken party like the Lib Dems, potential voters) than it gains.
Labour have desisted because it prevents the Tories boring on endlessly about Brexit to their benefit. The Lib Dems aren't competing for government so don't have that problem.
The alternative proposition - effectively rejoin asap - was defeated 331 to 1071. So from a LibDem perspective the outcome is a move toward realism. The final wording can be played long and, like Brown's tests for the Euro, might never happen. You can't blame them however for saying that the best position for the UK is to be back in the EU. If next year goes badly that view might be more widespread than it is now.
If you actually want to win an election and do something that would satisfy the most people the goal should be joining or cloning EFTA, not rejoining the EU.
Thanks for this. For all the chaff being thrown about, this looks a decisive Biden victory and quite possibly in landslide territory.
My sell on Trump EV at 245 on Spreadex is looking good.
Yes, but I wouldn't expect to make fortunes on it.
There's a lot of chatter on the pro-Trump media (such as the Center for American Greatness) about Trump picking up Black and Hispanic votes and it's true he's doing marginally better among Hispanic voters than in 2016 but his big problem is, surprisingly, white voters where a 21% advantage in 2016 is now 7% so that's a 7% swing to Biden among the group which supplies over 2/3 of the voters.
Trump is making small progress among minority voter blocs while he has lost more ground among the majority bloc. That may help him in Arizona, Florida, Nevada and perhaps Texas but not elsewhere. The other conundrum is the polls are of "Likely" voters - I suspect what we saw in 2016 was a number of Trump voters were never seen as they were not considered "Likely" while some other "Likely" Clinton voters stayed at home.
That might happen again and it may explain why Rasmussen/Trafalgar show such different results as they are actively trying to hunt down "shy Trump" voters - I don't know. I see mounting evidence for an 8-10% national lead for Biden and I see evidence the battleground has shifted away from the rustbelt states to places like Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, New Hampshire and Texas.
IF Biden wins Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and holds all of Clinton's 2016 states, he wins. Force me to make a forecast right now and I'm at 305-233 for Biden but that's only where I am now on what I'm seeing now - it's not a final prediction.
Excellent post.
This is where picking Biden made a difference.
If the Democrats had picked, say, Sanders those White voters simply wouldn't be coming over.
Comments
I can see the Tories being severely damaged by Covid and Brexit, but then 2024 might be the election no one wants to win.
Our primitive brains are no match for the godlike technology that dominates and manipulates our lives. No wonder we’re losing our grip on the truth, says John Lanchester" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bf39aa8c-fd86-11ea-b722-e6d55bc5f059
That's what he WANTS you to think!
Because...erm...Clinton, Soros, etc.
Confirms my view only ever to bet on sports when someone tells me to.
And in case anyone has forgotten Trump is currently fighting giving a DNA sample in a defamation case that came about because of yet another rape accusation.
With Trump, the GOP, and his supporters it often comes back to projection.
Here’s his interview with Rogan:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Jyb2JhysVr4
The impression that Cameron did not 'stand for anything' ... Even behind closed doors, he rarely seemed exercised by any single issue. (A confidant of Cameron's says the most animated he ever saw the Tory leader was 'in his dislike for John Bercow'.)
Call Me Dave.
The unauthorised biography of David Cameron.
Worth noting for punters.
In October 2015 we went Top of the League at half time, so I did a screen grab, thinking I would never see it again. Ye of little faith...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/14/teen-models-powerful-men-when-donald-trump-hosted-look-of-the-year
Indeed perhaps Q anon is a false flag operation, and the real satan worshipping paedophile is....
I may be doing them a disservice, but better safe than sorry.
And given the state of the US administration, no one to be relied on there.
Once again, plenty of new polling data over which to ponder.
The Siena poll for the New York Times used 950 Likely voters with a Margin of Error of 3.5%
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/us0920-crosstabs/e9c96a16d8951e8c/full.pdf
Biden leads 49-41 overall. With men it's tied at 45 and with women Biden leads by 16 so the swing to Biden among men is greater than the swing among women. Trump leads White voters 49-42 so that's a swing of 7% from 2016 but among Hispanics Biden leads 59-31 so a small 2% swing to Trump among that group. Apart from a 6% lead in the south, Trump trails Biden everywhere else.
By education, Trump has improved his position among those with a High School diploma or less - he won that group 51-45 in 2016 and now leads 52-38 so a 4% swing to the President but half those voting are graduates or have post-graduate education and Trump trails badly in that group.
The ABC News/Washington Post poll has Biden leading Trump 54-44 in a straight match but including Jorgensen and Hawkins Biden's lead falls to six with a 49-43 advantage. I can't reach the crosstabs so if anyone can shed any light on the detail that would be helpful. I assume the 10-point lead is a forced choice between Biden and Trump.
On to the plethora of state polling and NBC News/Marist has strong Biden leads in both Michigan and Wisconsin so I won't dwell on those.
YouGov has done three State polls for CBS News - in North Carolina, it's yet another TCTC poll with Biden up 48-46 and 4% still undecided among a poll of 1,213 Likely voters and an MoE of 3.6%. In Georgia, it's similar with Trump leading 47-46 and 5% still undecided on a poll of 1.164 Likely voters (MoE 3.3%). In South Carolina, which Trump won by 14 in 2016, he now leads by 52-42 so a better poll for the President with only a 2% swing against him and on that evidence South Carolina stays firmly in the Red camp but North Carolina is very much TCTC as is Georgia.
Rasmussen has conducted a poll for the Center for American Greatness whose partiality is fairly blatant:
https://amgreatness.com/2020/09/26/trump-surging-with-hispanic-and-black-voters-in-critical-states/
Biden leads 47-46 among Likely voters and 49-48 after a degree of Leaning. The crosstabs are in spreadsheet form so at least you can view and analyse them and if you know more about the demographics of Nevada than I, you can judge as to whether the sampling is reasonable. Clinton won Nevada by 1.5 points last time.
Among the 90% White, Black and Hispanic parts of the sample, Biden leads by 2 points but a 20-point lead for Trump among the 10% "Other" cuts that right back - I'm not convinced.
My sell on Trump EV at 245 on Spreadex is looking good.
That's kind of the genius of QAnon.
There's a lot of chatter on the pro-Trump media (such as the Center for American Greatness) about Trump picking up Black and Hispanic votes and it's true he's doing marginally better among Hispanic voters than in 2016 but his big problem is, surprisingly, white voters where a 21% advantage in 2016 is now 7% so that's a 7% swing to Biden among the group which supplies over 2/3 of the voters.
Trump is making small progress among minority voter blocs while he has lost more ground among the majority bloc. That may help him in Arizona, Florida, Nevada and perhaps Texas but not elsewhere. The other conundrum is the polls are of "Likely" voters - I suspect what we saw in 2016 was a number of Trump voters were never seen as they were not considered "Likely" while some other "Likely" Clinton voters stayed at home.
That might happen again and it may explain why Rasmussen/Trafalgar show such different results as they are actively trying to hunt down "shy Trump" voters - I don't know. I see mounting evidence for an 8-10% national lead for Biden and I see evidence the battleground has shifted away from the rustbelt states to places like Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, New Hampshire and Texas.
IF Biden wins Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and holds all of Clinton's 2016 states, he wins. Force me to make a forecast right now and I'm at 305-233 for Biden but that's only where I am now on what I'm seeing now - it's not a final prediction.
That's ≈ £1500 for every UK citizen.
Well this is a terrible policy
This is sure to be entertaining. Persistently rubbish
But like I say, the pointless curfew has "must be seen to be doing something" written all over it. I don't know, given the suspicions I already harbour about Johnson perhaps the uselessness and likely counter-productivity of the measure is even deliberate? Failure equips him with an excuse to keep turning the screw.
A Labour C&S is being formed with the Lib Dems.
The condition is a referendum on rejoining the EU.
Labour campaigns to stay out. Lib Dems campaign for rejoin.
Lib Dems fail spectacularly.
It's now 2029.
Lib Dem wipe out, Labour majority.
Deja vu.
The actual wording is this:
"In the longer term, Conference resolves to support a longer term objective of UK membership of the EU at an appropriate future date to be determined by political circumstances, subject to public assent, market and trade conditions and acceptable negotiated terms."
As a Leave-voting ex-LD I'm perfectly comfortable with this. It's so loaded with caveats as to be aspirational at best and the circumstances in which all the above conditions are in place are as likely as me owning, training and riding a 250/1 Grand National winner. There's no commitment to Schengen, the Euro or any of that.
The only ones calling it "terrible" are a) those Leavers who wish to close down the debate on re-joining the EU for all time and b) those who aren't well disposed towards the LDs.
The impact is to make pubgoers act as if they are under 'time pressure' in the pub. This will include many who would typically leave around 10pm in any case and would have drank in a normal relaxed sensible manner but now almost have to time the point that each drink is ordered! The table service also doesn't help here either - if the pub is busy there is an implicit pressure to get served from 9.15 to be able to have 'one last drink' whereas with a sensible approach, one would just go up the bar, get the beer and get on with it sensibly.
A solution - allow 20 mins drinking up time ie Back to the 80s possibly with an extra 30s mins serving time, ie last orders 10.30 everyone out by 11?
They released an upgrade today so that you can enter the results of tests *through the NHS, but not booked through the app*.
Previously, the app only worked with test results for tests *booked with the app*
I suspect this story is 99% bollocks but regardless, shops can do what they want.
Note the racism against Asian people
Edit:
For our QAnon readers, do read carefully, I hope satire isn't dead
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/09/18/transgender-satanist-anarchist-republican-nomination-county-sheriff-new-hampshire-aria-dimezzo/
Which brings me to Dubai, who is clearly a Brexit believer, who might be tasked with selling Brexit in 2021/22, after it has all descended into a disaster, not even of ideology, but of chronic underrepreparation.
Sunak strikes me as a man who at least will have a clue of why he wanted Brexit in the first place, and it will be interesting to see if he can sell a long term vision from the ashes. I guess his ideas are somewhat Singapore-on-Thames in nature, but that in itself won't sell - the Red wall demands a workers' vision of Singapore-on-Trent to boot.
Perhaps a transexual 'f* the Police' Chief' may have lessons to offer for how, in extremis, Mr Yorkshire Tea will need to sell his vision.
It's cheaper to have lifeboats on the ship.....
If they think that forcing a company to release a semi-tested vaccine is in their interests, they will attempt to do so. By any means.
One might even go so far as to say that Healey's First Law of Holes applies in this case. The party has already disappeared several hundred miles in the direction of the Earth's core, so that now it finds itself invisible and, when the faint echo of its voice is occasionally heard, the only word that can be made out is "Europe." They need to start climbing out again - this entails urgently finding something else to shout about and desisting from further caterwauling about bloody Brexit.
The only think Trump should be discussing is the economy. Everything else is free points for the Dems.
2. The public was already sick to death of hearing about Brexit even before Covid started
There's no mileage in boring on endlessly about Brexit for a serious political party, which is why Labour have desisted. That goes double for any noises about rejoining: CHB is right. It loses you more voters (or, in the case of a shrunken party like the Lib Dems, potential voters) than it gains.
Another way of saying it matters more to the Republican base than the Democrat one - but this could rapidly change.
This is where picking Biden made a difference.
If the Democrats had picked, say, Sanders those White voters simply wouldn't be coming over.