UK punters getting nervous about Biden’s prospects and the money is going on Trump – politicalbettin
Options
UK punters getting nervous about Biden’s prospects and the money is going on Trump – politicalbetting.com
Chart from Betdata.io of the Betfair exchange market.
0
Comments
-
1st?0
-
Second like Biden0
-
If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
Can he run his campaign from Attica?HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated2 -
Would this do it? -HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated
https://www.270towin.com/maps/AJjQW
Plus 12m down in the PV.0 -
Good afternoon.1
-
That would just about do it, it would still be slightly better for Trump than the 52 EC votes Goldwater got in 1964 but would be worse than the 159 EC votes Dole got in 1996 which is the worst GOP defeat currently at a presidential election since 1964kinabalu said:
Would this do it? -HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated
https://www.270towin.com/maps/AJjQW
Plus 12m down in the PV.1 -
No - they will run Ivanka. The GOP would not run a candidate limited to a one-term presidencyHYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
If Trump loses expect him to be airbrushed out of Republican history almost immediately. A candidacy in 2024 would be sheer fantasy.HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated1 -
He'd be 78 years old to boot...Chris said:
If Trump loses expect him to be airbrushed out of Republican history almost immediately. A candidacy in 2024 would be sheer fantasy.HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
You can run for 2 non consecutive terms as Cleveland did in the 19th century if you lose your first re election battle, Ivanka is too RINO for the GOP base anyway unlike her fathernot_on_fire said:
No - they will run Ivanka. The GOP would not run a candidate limited to a one-term presidencyHYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
Yeah but this isn't the 19th century. Trump will endorse one of kids in an attempt to go for a George W Bush style name boost. You're right that it may not be Ivanka.HYUFD said:
You can run for 2 non consecutive terms as Cleveland did in the 19th century if you lose your first re election battle, Ivanka is too RINO for the GOP base anyway unlike her fathernot_on_fire said:
No - they will run Ivanka. The GOP would not run a candidate limited to a one-term presidencyHYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
If he only loses narrowly this year in 2024 the GOP base which makes up their primary vote and chooses the GOP nominee will still be behind him if he runs again, they will only abandon him if he is trounced as it took a Labour trouncing and their worst defeat since 1935 last year for the Labour membership to shift from Corbyn to Starmer this yearChris said:
If Trump loses expect him to be airbrushed out of Republican history almost immediately. A candidacy in 2024 would be sheer fantasy.HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
Maybe Trump told his aides he'd be "on the run" in 2024?3
-
Does Han Dodges read PB.com?
https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1323613856111960069?s=21
Mr Navabi pointed this out on the previous thread (though not the pattern Mr Dodges mentions).0 -
Id expect Trump TV to be the dominant influence of the Republican party in 2024. Kingmaker and influencer rather than candidate.Chris said:
If Trump loses expect him to be airbrushed out of Republican history almost immediately. A candidacy in 2024 would be sheer fantasy.HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
Told ya so.0
-
Occasionally, plus he does follow me on Twitter.CarlottaVance said:Does Han Dodges read PB.com?
https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1323613856111960069?s=21
Mr Navabi pointed this out on the previous thread (though not the pattern Mr Dodges mentions).0 -
Late to the new thread like the absolute twats who turn up to the polling station on election day 1 minute after it closes and then have a meltdown about how unfair it all is.0
-
Registrations are not the be all and end all. Some states are 'high crossover' and there are many independents. Its a secret ballot FFS.CarlottaVance said:Does Han Dodges read PB.com?
https://twitter.com/dpjhodges/status/1323613856111960069?s=21
Mr Navabi pointed this out on the previous thread (though not the pattern Mr Dodges mentions).0 -
From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/13236178909485711400 -
I’m always amazed by the amount of live data you can get on US elections vs our own (yeah I have a crap memory). We must look really weird to them.0
-
Trump lives for his rallies...all the other stuff, like actually running the free world, Boooooring, but the opportunity to freestyle for an hour to 50,000 adoring fans is what he loves.
If he going to turn into similar to one of those aging rock bands, who weren't that good to start with, but had a couple of big hits and still at 70 they just have to continue to tour to have their egos stroked.1 -
How long will it be this time before you're pretending you never said any of this stuff?HYUFD said:
If he only loses narrowly this year in 2024 the GOP base which makes up their primary vote and chooses the GOP nominee will still be behind him if he runs again, they will only abandon him if he is trounced as it took a Labour trouncing and their worst defeat since 1935 last year for the Labour membership to shift from Corbyn to Starmer this yearChris said:
If Trump loses expect him to be airbrushed out of Republican history almost immediately. A candidacy in 2024 would be sheer fantasy.HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated1 -
He even performed The Snake a couple of days ago, for old time's sake.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump lives for his rallies...all the other stuff, like actually running the free world, Boooooring, but the opportunity to freestyle for an hour to 50,000 adoring fans is what he loves.
If he going to turn into similar to one of those aging rock bands, who weren't that good to start with, but had a couple of big hits and still at 70 they just have to continue to tour to have their egos stroked.0 -
I think we can safely assume that no future President will send him on a delicate diplomatic mission...FrancisUrquhart said:Trump lives for his rallies...all the other stuff, like actually running the free world, Boooooring, but the opportunity to freestyle for an hour to 50,000 adoring fans is what he loves.
If he going to turn into similar to one of those aging rock bands, who weren't that good to start with, but had a couple of big hits and still at 70 they just have to continue to tour to have their egos stroked.
0 -
Yes, Trump is like Boris in that respect, governing is an awful bore but they love campaigning.FrancisUrquhart said:Trump lives for his rallies...all the other stuff, like actually running the free world, Boooooring, but the opportunity to freestyle for an hour to 50,000 adoring fans is what he loves.
If he going to turn into similar to one of those aging rock bands, who weren't that good to start with, but had a couple of big hits and still at 70 they just have to continue to tour to have their egos stroked.
May and Hillary were the opposite, they loved the technical aspects of government and policy, they were hopeless campaigners0 -
Ambassador to North Korea?Time_to_Leave said:
I think we can safely assume that no future President will send him on a delicate diplomatic mission...FrancisUrquhart said:Trump lives for his rallies...all the other stuff, like actually running the free world, Boooooring, but the opportunity to freestyle for an hour to 50,000 adoring fans is what he loves.
If he going to turn into similar to one of those aging rock bands, who weren't that good to start with, but had a couple of big hits and still at 70 they just have to continue to tour to have their egos stroked.1 -
-
If he does lose (which I expect), Trump TV is going to be yuuuuuuge...i mean look at the numbers the second rate surrogates like Hannity do, when his fans can have the real deal on 5 nights a week.0
-
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/13236178909485711400 -
Assert our claim to our colonies.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Trump seems to be drifting back out a bit now.
He's back out to 2.78 on Betfair Exchange.0 -
Always defending the bigots, why am I not surprised.MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/13236178909485711401 -
MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1323617890948571140
Yeah yeah, false flag, bla bla 1 -
What happened in 2000?TheScreamingEagles said:
I don't think Biden will be angered by leaders being diplomatic, I don't think he's remotely as insecure as Trump is.0 -
There are unconfirmed reports of Jussie Smollett being seen in the area with a MAGA hat on and a can of red paint.MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/13236178909485711401 -
fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.0 -
I will be suitably entertained whatever happens tonight. If Biden hands Trump his ass on a platter great. If Trump pulls off a shock GONSDAP win then lol funny.
Never mind Trump saying "build that wall". If he wins again I can see Canada wanting to close the border to Gilead.0 -
You congratulate the winner. The loser might be annoyed with you for 3 months but in three months time he will likely be in an orange jumpsuit with other things to worry about.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Easy to tell if it’s Trump supporters. Is the spelling correct?Gallowgate said:MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1323617890948571140 Yeah yeah, false flag, bla bla
0 -
I'll answer on the previous thread to avoid cluttering up this one.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.0 -
It isn't a hard decision. If Biden wins bigly, it also means he wins power in house and senate. You have little to worry about from Trump having a tantrum, as he has little power to effect the future.0
-
Not least because if you had the misfortune to come across right-wing antisemites online you'd realise they hate Trump with a passion. The reasons should be pretty obvious.MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/13236178909485711400 -
I'd watch your words @TSE. I'm not defending any bigots. What I am questioning is "cui bono" this is.TheScreamingEagles said:
Always defending the bigots, why am I not surprised.MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1323617890948571140
0 -
The worst result is a really slim win for either side. Months of legal battles and the nutters on both sides will be out on the streets demanding justice / protecting democracy.0
-
More positive news from WisconsinMrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1323617890948571140
https://twitter.com/NYDailyNews/status/1323329890213658627?s=201 -
It's been closed for nearly 8 months already.RochdalePioneers said:I will be suitably entertained whatever happens tonight. If Biden hands Trump his ass on a platter great. If Trump pulls off a shock GONSDAP win then lol funny.
Never mind Trump saying "build that wall". If he wins again I can see Canada wanting to close the border to Gilead.0 -
Adding false-flagism bigoted conspiracy theories to your already burgeoning portfolio of luxuriating in voter suppression.MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/13236178909485711400 -
It is going to be a clear victory for Joe, bye Don.FrancisUrquhart said:The worst result is a really slim win for either side. Months of legal battles and the nutters on both sides will be out on the streets demanding justice / protecting democracy.
0 -
RochdalePioneers said:
I will be suitably entertained whatever happens tonight. If Biden hands Trump his ass on a platter great. If Trump pulls off a shock GONSDAP win then lol funny.
Never mind Trump saying "build that wall". If he wins again I can see Canada wanting to close the border to Gilead.
You are a very weird person.0 -
IIRC the fact that we have our General Election results ready so soon, without lawyers, and have the next occupant in No. 10 before you can snap your fingers seems very strange to them.Time_to_Leave said:I’m always amazed by the amount of live data you can get on US elections vs our own (yeah I have a crap memory). We must look really weird to them.
Remember, whatever happens.... we have 2 more months of President Trump. FFS.
1 -
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.8 -
FPT:
dixiedean said:
» show previous quotes
True. But a couple of caveats. 3 of the Tory holds are by fewer than 200 votes off that poll. Aberconwy, Wrexham and Vale of Glamorgan. Make it 8 and it is a bit more than reverting to 2017.
And, of course, apart from Ynys Mon, none of these constituencies will exist come 2024 anyways.
Make it 8 and you are going beyond what the poll suggests. Which negates the exercise completely to something akin to a wishlist. I agree on the last point and overall the boundary changes actually make the Labour task a bit harder most likely - both in Wales and in the UK.0 -
Well othet than when Gordon Brown enacted a sit in.....but yes thst really was the exception.Malmesbury said:
IIRC the fact that we have our General Election results ready so soon, without lawyers, and have the next occupant in No. 10 before you can snap your fingers seems very strange to them.Time_to_Leave said:I’m always amazed by the amount of live data you can get on US elections vs our own (yeah I have a crap memory). We must look really weird to them.
Remember, whatever happens.... we have 2 more months of President Trump. FFS.1 -
Wow that is one of the most jaw droppingly racist things I've ever read on this site. 😲TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.3 -
Trump will not concede regardless of how big the Biden win is. He will declare the election stolen, the coverage of crooked Joe to be fake news and get on with his plan to nuke Covid whilst he still has control of the launch codes.Beibheirli_C said:
You congratulate the winner. The loser might be annoyed with you for 3 months but in three months time he will likely be in an orange jumpsuit with other things to worry about.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Last time, Pinellas County went 50.6% Trump, 49.4% Clinton.Richard_Nabavi said:This is remarkable (or maybe y'all knew about it already) - you can look at Florida voting patterns in real time. This for example is Pinellas country, which in 2016 split pretty much evenly Trump/Clinton. You can see the registered Dem early advantage, but more GOP-registered voting today:
https://tqv.vrswebapps.com/?state=FL&county=pin
Assuming:
People vote according to their registrations
The unaffliated split 50/50 Trump/Biden
The turnout is 77% (last time was 77%)
then the result in this county would be 50.8% Trump, 49.2% Biden (basically same as last time)
It is very sensitive to turnout and unaffiliated split.
Turnout of 80% gives 51.4% Trump 48.6% Biden (as voters on the day favour Trump)
Unaffliated split 40/60 Trump/Biden and 80% turnout gives 49.0% Trump, 51.0% Biden.
My feel on this small amount of data on just one county in Florida is that it favours Trump holding Florida.
0 -
Can I just remind everyne that it is not even 9am on the East Coast yet?Gallowgate said:2 -
Alternatively in Broward County Florida (pro Dem), turnout has surpassed 2016 and the enormous Dem leading is holding.
https://tqv.vrswebapps.com/?state=FL&county=bro1 -
FYI Sumter is at 81% turnout and will likely go higher. Not so many in-person votes yet but Republicans leading Democrats by registration by nearly 5 to 1Barnesian said:
Last time, Pinellas County went 50.6% Trump, 49.4% Clinton.Richard_Nabavi said:This is remarkable (or maybe y'all knew about it already) - you can look at Florida voting patterns in real time. This for example is Pinellas country, which in 2016 split pretty much evenly Trump/Clinton. You can see the registered Dem early advantage, but more GOP-registered voting today:
https://tqv.vrswebapps.com/?state=FL&county=pin
Assuming:
People vote according to their registrations
The unaffliated split 50/50 Trump/Biden
The turnout is 77% (last time was 77%)
then the result in this county would be 50.8% Trump, 49.2% Biden (basically same as last time)
It is very sensitive to turnout and unaffiliated split.
Turnout of 80% gives 51.4% Trump 48.6% Biden (as voters on the day favour Trump)
Unaffliated split 40/60 Trump/Biden and 80% turnout gives 49.0% Trump, 51.0% Biden.
My feel on this small amount of data on just one county in Florida is that it favours Trump holding Florida.0 -
Do we have anything like Andy_JS's spreadsheet for this election for keeping an eye on results?0
-
Denmark are making Islamic terrorists statelessTOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.0 -
This is what he/she/it then said:Philip_Thompson said:
Wow that is one of the most jaw droppingly racist things I've ever read on this site. 😲TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
"He has Pakistani parents and ethnically Pakistanis are allowed to relocate back there."0 -
What about child murderers?isam said:
Denmark are making Islamic terrorists statelessTOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.0 -
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
0 -
Again - it's barely 9am!Gallowgate said:Alternatively in Broward County Florida (pro Dem), turnout has surpassed 2016 and the enormous Dem leading is holding.
https://tqv.vrswebapps.com/?state=FL&county=bro0 -
It'll make it easier to deport Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson to New York for his crimes of fecking up Covid-19 and delivering a No Deal Brexit.Topping said:Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?
2 -
Alexander is a popular name in Russia ...TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.0 -
Ah I see you are selectively quoting parts of our discussion on here rather than the other thread where we agreed to discuss it to try to make me look bad.TOPPING said:
This is what he/she/it then said:Philip_Thompson said:
Wow that is one of the most jaw droppingly racist things I've ever read on this site. 😲TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
"He has Pakistani parents and ethnically Pakistanis are allowed to relocate back there."
I said convicted Islamic terrorists should be deported back after their sentence is completed. Clever Topping here is trying to make it sound like I meant all foreigners. What a lovely chap he is.0 -
DAlexander? Hmmmm... isn't Alexander a Greek name?Philip_Thompson said:
Wow that is one of the most jaw droppingly racist things I've ever read on this site. 😲TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.1 -
Then the Secret Service and other enforcement branches will simply march him out of the Whitehouse. Their oath is to defend the Constitution not to serve the President.RochdalePioneers said:
Trump will not concede regardless of how big the Biden win is. He will declare the election stolen, the coverage of crooked Joe to be fake news and get on with his plan to nuke Covid whilst he still has control of the launch codes.Beibheirli_C said:
You congratulate the winner. The loser might be annoyed with you for 3 months but in three months time he will likely be in an orange jumpsuit with other things to worry about.TheScreamingEagles said:
The thought of four USSS personnel taking a limb each and carrying the screaming toddler out of the Whitehouse ..... if videoed it be would be viral in minutes 3 -
As I said to @TSE, cui bono is this attack? It may very well be Trump supporters but it is stupid if it is given the importance of Florida to the election and the wide publicity the attack has gotten.Anabobazina said:
Adding false-flagism bigoted conspiracy theories to your already burgeoning portfolio of luxuriating in voter suppression.MrEd said:
Being slightly sceptical here but let's say you wanted to discredit Trump - surely this is the sort of thing you would do?TheScreamingEagles said:From the people who chanted 'Jews will not replace us'?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1323617890948571140
By the way, given you support Joe "You Ain't Black" Biden, can I assume you support the idea of a group of people being owned by a political party based on the colour of their skin?0 -
A tie with Betfair Sports has been reduced from 33/1 a couple of days ago to 26/1.
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics/2020-us-presidential-election/10393583/electoral-college-vote-tie-special/924.237362868
Is there a market for this on Betfair Exchange? I can't find one.0 -
Mate I'm just quoting what you wrote.DAlexander said:
Ah I see you are selectively quoting parts of our discussion on here rather than the other thread where we agreed to discuss it to try to make me look bad.TOPPING said:
This is what he/she/it then said:Philip_Thompson said:
Wow that is one of the most jaw droppingly racist things I've ever read on this site. 😲TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
"He has Pakistani parents and ethnically Pakistanis are allowed to relocate back there."
I said convicted Islamic terrorists should be deported back after their sentence is completed. Clever Topping here is trying to make it sound like I meant all foreigners. What a lovely chap he is.0 -
You can find other counties by replacing the final three letters of the URLBarnesian said:
Last time, Pinellas County went 50.6% Trump, 49.4% Clinton.Richard_Nabavi said:This is remarkable (or maybe y'all knew about it already) - you can look at Florida voting patterns in real time. This for example is Pinellas country, which in 2016 split pretty much evenly Trump/Clinton. You can see the registered Dem early advantage, but more GOP-registered voting today:
https://tqv.vrswebapps.com/?state=FL&county=pin
Assuming:
People vote according to their registrations
The unaffliated split 50/50 Trump/Biden
The turnout is 77% (last time was 77%)
then the result in this county would be 50.8% Trump, 49.2% Biden (basically same as last time)
It is very sensitive to turnout and unaffiliated split.
Turnout of 80% gives 51.4% Trump 48.6% Biden (as voters on the day favour Trump)
Unaffliated split 40/60 Trump/Biden and 80% turnout gives 49.0% Trump, 51.0% Biden.
My feel on this small amount of data on just one county in Florida is that it favours Trump holding Florida.1 -
Deported back where?!DAlexander said:
Ah I see you are selectively quoting parts of our discussion on here rather than the other thread where we agreed to discuss it to try to make me look bad.TOPPING said:
This is what he/she/it then said:Philip_Thompson said:
Wow that is one of the most jaw droppingly racist things I've ever read on this site. 😲TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
"He has Pakistani parents and ethnically Pakistanis are allowed to relocate back there."
I said convicted Islamic terrorists should be deported back after their sentence is completed. Clever Topping here is trying to make it sound like I meant all foreigners. What a lovely chap he is.0 -
Quite. If parts of the UK are not willing to support other parts in their time of need what's the point of it? I have no concern there.Carnyx said:
Because the money is UK money. Not English. You're confusing the UK and England yet again.HYUFD said:
Why should English taxpayers pay for Scottish and Welsh furlough when England is not in lockdown?Carnyx said:
Furlough is a reserved matter. Why should Scottish or Welsh taxes go to subsidise an Enbglish lockdown when the reverse is not permitted?HYUFD said:
The PM's position is there will be no indyref2 allowed while he is PM, in any case they are still getting their furlough although in my view if Sturgeon or Drakeford do not impose a lockdown at the same time as the rest of the UK they should raise Scottish or Welsh taxes to pay for itGaussian said:
What is Dominic Cummings' opinion on Scottish Independence? If he wanted to push people towards it, that's a great way to go about it.CarlottaVance said:
It's certainly what I thought was implied.DAlexander said:
It's implied by saying it is ironic that his supporters are dancing along to the village people.Gallowgate said:
Who said anything about Trump being anti-gay? Only you.DAlexander said:
There's no evidence Trump is anti-gay and they were just playing a song. I don't see the problem.Gallowgate said:
Because LGBT is clearly on the opposite side of the "culture war", and the Village People are camp AF.DAlexander said:
Why is it ironic?Mexicanpete said:
Is the irony of Trump and his supporters dancing along to the Village People lost on the Trumpsters?HYUFD said:
The way the left thinks they have a monopoly on anything possibly gay is just bizarre.
It's not complicated.
0 -
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.DougSeal said:
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.0 -
Understatement. Itd breach the speed of light.Beibheirli_C said:
Then the Secret Service and other enforcement branches will simply march him out of the Whitehouse. Their oath is to defend the Constitution not to serve the President.RochdalePioneers said:
Trump will not concede regardless of how big the Biden win is. He will declare the election stolen, the coverage of crooked Joe to be fake news and get on with his plan to nuke Covid whilst he still has control of the launch codes.Beibheirli_C said:
You congratulate the winner. The loser might be annoyed with you for 3 months but in three months time he will likely be in an orange jumpsuit with other things to worry about.TheScreamingEagles said:
The thought of four USSS personnel taking a limb each and carrying the screaming toddler out of the Whitehouse ..... if videoed it be would be viral in minutes0 -
https://twitter.com/PeterSchorschFL/status/1323618317882544131?s=20
This is interesting. They still predict Biden will win Pinellas, and have factored in 2.5:1 GOP election day advantage.0 -
That much is certain. However:Anabobazina said:RochdalePioneers said:I will be suitably entertained whatever happens tonight. If Biden hands Trump his ass on a platter great. If Trump pulls off a shock GONSDAP win then lol funny.
Never mind Trump saying "build that wall". If he wins again I can see Canada wanting to close the border to Gilead.
You are a very weird person.
"GONSDAP" refers to the near fascism of the GOP in its pursuit of stopping people voting and its enjoyment of heavily armed private militia
"Gilead" refers to what the Pence wing of American "Christians" want America to become.
Canada closes the border to Gilead in the book as well.0 -
There's also prison, or ill health, for starters.HYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated
I think he's very much an outside bet for 2024.0 -
I'm glad you're here.isam said:
Denmark are making Islamic terrorists statelessTOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Supporting this sensible move by Denmark means you are a racist bigot who needs to be driven off the website apparently.
Anyway I'm off for a bit before this discussion ruins this thread as well.0 -
Who was British by birth.DAlexander said:
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.DougSeal said:
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
Are you going for blood and soil nationlism on us?
Asking for a friend whose grandparents were born overseas.5 -
Yes and he was born in Leeds.DAlexander said:
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.DougSeal said:
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.0 -
Honestly itd be hilarious if Biden wins, not even by much, and Trump shocked everyone by reacting gracefully.
Wont happen, his schtick is no act, as seems to have shocked many who worked for him, but it would be amusing to see his supporters' reaction to gracefully defeat
Still, I'm a Biden better, as someone coined it, so no chickens counted.0 -
That only leaves the coke head or the idiot. Not much of a prospect.not_on_fire said:
Yeah but this isn't the 19th century. Trump will endorse one of kids in an attempt to go for a George W Bush style name boost. You're right that it may not be Ivanka.HYUFD said:
You can run for 2 non consecutive terms as Cleveland did in the 19th century if you lose your first re election battle, Ivanka is too RINO for the GOP base anyway unlike her fathernot_on_fire said:
No - they will run Ivanka. The GOP would not run a candidate limited to a one-term presidencyHYUFD said:If Trump loses and Biden only wins narrowly I would certainly expect Trump to run again in 2024.
No other Republican would likely be able to beat him for the nomination and Harris would be an easier opponent for him than Biden and he could paint her as radical left in a way he could not do for the former Vice President, assuming Biden will be too old to run again.
It would take a Biden-Harris landslide of LBJ 1964 levels and Trump to face the worst GOP defeat since Goldwater for him to leave the scene even if defeated0 -
Out of curiosity @DAlexander where would you deport Thomas Mair to?1
-
I'm talking about the months between election day and inauguration day. He will legally and constitutionally be president which leaves him free to do what he wants.Beibheirli_C said:
Then the Secret Service and other enforcement branches will simply march him out of the Whitehouse. Their oath is to defend the Constitution not to serve the President.RochdalePioneers said:
Trump will not concede regardless of how big the Biden win is. He will declare the election stolen, the coverage of crooked Joe to be fake news and get on with his plan to nuke Covid whilst he still has control of the launch codes.Beibheirli_C said:
You congratulate the winner. The loser might be annoyed with you for 3 months but in three months time he will likely be in an orange jumpsuit with other things to worry about.TheScreamingEagles said:
The thought of four USSS personnel taking a limb each and carrying the screaming toddler out of the Whitehouse ..... if videoed it be would be viral in minutes0 -
Definitely not.TheScreamingEagles said:
Who was British by birth.DAlexander said:
Mohammad Sidique Khan is one of the 7/7 bombers. I thought I'd add that context before Topping gets me banned.DougSeal said:
That's got to be worth a sin-bin surely?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.
Are you going for blood and soil nationlism on us?
Asking for a friend whose grandparents were born overseas.
Your friend will be fine as long as he doesn't commit any terrorist acts don't worry.0 -
For the last hour its been remarkably consistent - 1000 rep, 500 dem, 500 npa every 10 minsGallowgate said:https://twitter.com/PeterSchorschFL/status/1323618317882544131?s=20
This is interesting. They still predict Biden will win Pinellas, and have factored in 2.5:1 GOP election day advantage.0 -
Survey USA poll
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=bb4f5a47-75fb-4f45-a667-c06a9b5d3203
Superb covid questions
If you know someone who died of Covid that makes you 62/36 a Biden supporter.
But if you have had Covid yourself you are 50/47 a Trump supporter.
0 -
Shit, my name Irish, I don't think that passes muster either.TOPPING said:
Oh! We're using peoples' names to determine whether they are English. Are you being serious?DAlexander said:
Well for example Mohammad Sidique Khan could be deported back to Pakistan.TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Surprised you didn't manage to work out that Mohammad Sidique Khan isn't a native English name.0 -
Does "changing your family name to something more English" help?TOPPING said:fpt
What about the 7/7 perpetrators. Where in Leeds or Bucks would you have deported them to?DAlexander said:
He was released early because of his age.Gallowgate said:
Isn't that exactly what happened in this case? He was deemed no longer a danger to the public.DAlexander said:
Until at the very least he's deemed no longer a danger to the public.Gallowgate said:
Forever?DAlexander said:
The bloke tried to join ISIS, I think it's a fairly reasonable conclusion to draw that he should be behind bars.Gallowgate said:
Because this isn't about money, this is about people's liberty.Philip_Thompson said:
Why is it wrong to complain about lawyers using every trick to pervert the system?Gallowgate said:
Again, stop putting words in my mouth.DAlexander said:
I could have guessed that you would have supported releasing this bloke to allow him to go on a gun rampage.Gallowgate said:
You want to defend western democratic values against islamism by ripping up the rule of law, its very foundation?DAlexander said:
FFS this sums up European handling of the problem.FrancisUrquhart said:Vienna gunman, 20, who killed four and wounded 17 was released early from prison on terror charges because of his age, had wanted to join ISIS in Syria - but 'was deemed incapable of an attack'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8906871/Shots-fired-near-synagogue-Vienna-police-say-major-operation-underway.html
Had they tried to keep him in jail I can imagine all sorts of human rights lawyers taking the government to the cleaners.
You my friend may want to think that through.
I don't want to rip up the rule of law, I want the law changed to stop people like this getting released for a very long time before being deported.
If you want to change the law that's fine, but stop whinging about "human rights lawyers" who are simply ensuring that the Government operates within the law as it currently is.
How is that any different to complaining about aggressive tax avoidance?
Are lawyers perverting the system within the law any better than accountants doing the same?
If someone is lawfully avoiding paying taxes by their accountants using every trick in the book - or if someone is lawfully avoiding deportation by their lawyers using every trick in the book - should governments, campaigners and voters just accept that? Or should they identify the problem and look to fix it by closing the loopholes?
People like @DAlexander are very quick to criticise but very slow to produce any actual solutions.
If you want to dis-apply the Human Rights Act to "terrorism" suspects you then are into the territory of what constitutes a "terrorist" - is it simply at the whim of the Government? The court? Are you comfortable that your human rights could be similarly taken away, almost on an arbitrary basis?
You may be comfortable with that but people like @DAlexander never want to discuss the hard questions.
And please note I am not defending this bloke. I'm not defending him whatsoever. I am defending "human rights lawyers".
The problem isn't lawyers who get involved when there is a clear case of the law not being implemented correctly, but that isn't what happens. There are a group of human rights lawyers who target these particular cases and use every legal loophole and trick in the book to get them out of jail.
See you don't actually have a solution at all. You just like to whine about "lefty human rights lawyers".
My solution for Islamic terrorists is jail and then deportation at the end of the sentence.
Asking for a pensioner currently isolating near Slough.
0 -
You pop back here this time tomorrow.brokenwheel said:Told ya so.
0
This discussion has been closed.