As the counts continue it’s looking pretty certain that Biden will be heading for the White House –
Options
Comments
-
Good post.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.1 -
Re Coronavirus, has this been covered yet? @Nigelb would be v. interested to hear your thoughts.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/health/coronavirus-ferrets-vaccine-spray.html0 -
Yeah yeah, but coming back to the point, your analysis falls over at the very first hurdle: "Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other". No he didn't - not unless you expand your definition of the 'coalition' so far that it becomes completely meaningless: he appealed to lots of voters, urban, suburban and rural, all over the country, some very conservative, many less so, in every state, and particularly to ordinary working Americans.WhisperingOracle said:
Clinton, Blair and Obama were all to a certain extent the fruit of Reaganism and Thatcherism, though. Murdoch did not support Carter, Ford or Callaghan ; his aim was to help end the postwar consensus, and assist the rise both of deregulated and transnational finance capitalism and conservative populism.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a rather selective account of both 49-state-winning Reagan and Obama-supporting Murdoch.WhisperingOracle said:
Without wanting to be rude, as I've been developing the point, it should be fairly obvious by now ; Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, inasmuch as that is true (which isn't much, except that more people have degrees than 50 years ago), what on earth does it have to do with Talk Radio, Fox News, or the opioid crisis?WhisperingOracle said:
Not at all ; but post-Reagan finance-capitalism was in the ascendant, and as in Britain, the "people with finance degrees" , that Carlsson mentions, had far more leverage over every level of society.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think there were no dodgy corporations who risked public safety for profit before Reagan? Really?WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:
Murdoch and some others, including conservative talk radio, were the main cheerleaders for this new coalition and manifesto in the media. What Carlsson is decrying is not only baked into modern American conservatism, but something that his part of the media landscape is specifically historically linked to, too.2 -
If he compromises on State Aid, I think he'll get something back from the EU on fishing. He can wave some cod around and claim victory.ping said:
Good post.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.3 -
Sky news is fine, they moved to fairly neutral about 10 years ago, perhaps Fox will make the same shift.Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:0 -
Sorry, Mr President, you said they shouldn't be counted, so they were shredded.williamglenn said:1 -
You voted for Farage's Brexit party last May, the EU may compromise on fishing but the UK will have to compromise on state aid and Boris willPhilip_Thompson said:
There was never going to be a US trade deal either way. Trump couldn't negotiate a US trade deal and get it through a Democrat controlled House anyway.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.
A compromise is the best way out of this and always has been but that entails both parties to compromise, not just one.
I have never supported Farage ever.0 -
Both parties need to compromise on State Aid. What the EU originally asked for could never be accepted by a free country - but the landing strip for a reasonable compromise is there.OnboardG1 said:
If he compromises on State Aid, I think he'll get something back from the EU on fishing. He can wave some cod around and claim victory.ping said:
Good post.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.0 -
I don't agree here. Reagan captured a wide diversity of people, but the three prongs of his coalition and appeal were the same all over America ; those nostalgic for the moral and national certainties of the 1950s, over the 1960s ; the specifically Christian Right ; and the new economic and fiscal conservatives. The internal contradictions of these appeals were very great, and that's why Tucker Carlsson and others like him are struggling today.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yeah yeah, but coming back to the point, your analysis falls over at the very first hurdle: "Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other". No he didn't - not unless you expand your definition of the 'coalition' so far that it becomes completely meaningless: he appealed to lots of voters, urban, suburban and rural, all over the country, some very conservative, many less so, in every state, and particularly to ordinary working Americans.WhisperingOracle said:
Clinton, Blair and Obama were all to a certain extent the fruit of Reaganism and Thatcherism, though. Murdoch did not support Carter, Ford or Callaghan ; his aim was to help end the postwar consensus, and assist the rise both of deregulated and transnational finance capitalism and conservative populism.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a rather selective account of both 49-state-winning Reagan and Obama-supporting Murdoch.WhisperingOracle said:
Without wanting to be rude, as I've been developing the point, it should be fairly obvious by now ; Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, inasmuch as that is true (which isn't much, except that more people have degrees than 50 years ago), what on earth does it have to do with Talk Radio, Fox News, or the opioid crisis?WhisperingOracle said:
Not at all ; but post-Reagan finance-capitalism was in the ascendant, and as in Britain, the "people with finance degrees" , that Carlsson mentions, had far more leverage over every level of society.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think there were no dodgy corporations who risked public safety for profit before Reagan? Really?WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:
Murdoch and some others, including conservative talk radio, were the main cheerleaders for this new coalition and manifesto in the media. What Carlsson is decrying is not only baked into modern American conservatism, but something that his part of the media landscape is specifically historically linked to, too.
2 -
I didn't support Farage last May. I voted a protest vote to get rid of Theresa May, I still disliked Farage but took the opportunity to cast a protest vote - as did the overwhelming majority of all Tories you silly fool.HYUFD said:
You voted for Farage's Brexit party last May, the EU may compromise on fishing but the UK will have to compromise on state aid and Boris willPhilip_Thompson said:
There was never going to be a US trade deal either way. Trump couldn't negotiate a US trade deal and get it through a Democrat controlled House anyway.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.
A compromise is the best way out of this and always has been but that entails both parties to compromise, not just one.
I have never supported Farage ever.0 -
As long as he can do that and have a photocall in Grimsby with fish and chips he can spin it as the Great Boris Brexit Deal and move onOnboardG1 said:
If he compromises on State Aid, I think he'll get something back from the EU on fishing. He can wave some cod around and claim victory.ping said:
Good post.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.0 -
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:0 -
Exactly. There is no Trumpism. There is only Trump. Government by the Trump of the Trumpers for the Trumps.DecrepiterJohnL said:.
It also undermines Trump's claim to be a populist. He campaigns as one, but once in office, what has he done for these people? He gave eye-watering tax cuts to their bosses and the "half-wits with finance degrees" while trying to gut Obamacare for the people at his rallies.WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:1 -
You voted for Farage, Jesus.Philip_Thompson said:
I didn't support Farage last May. I voted a protest vote to get rid of Theresa May, I still disliked Farage but took the opportunity to cast a protest vote - as did the overwhelming majority of all Tories you silly fool.HYUFD said:
You voted for Farage's Brexit party last May, the EU may compromise on fishing but the UK will have to compromise on state aid and Boris willPhilip_Thompson said:
There was never going to be a US trade deal either way. Trump couldn't negotiate a US trade deal and get it through a Democrat controlled House anyway.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.
A compromise is the best way out of this and always has been but that entails both parties to compromise, not just one.
I have never supported Farage ever.1 -
Fox supported Trump at the election.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
If he insists on claiming he has won the election Fox can't possibly support him in that, it isn't true and they are at heart a news agency.0 -
I think it's worse than 50/50, I think Biden ends up at 51.75ish. I wouldn't be taking the bet.Quincel said:
For the record, I agree that it's around 50/50. Maybe even 40/60. But with the odds now slightly over 2/1 on Betfair I'd still make this tip.Andy_JS said:
It's 50/50 IMO.Casino_Royale said:How likely is it that Biden breaches 52%+ of the vote once everything is in?
I think he's at 50.5% at the moment and I could see him getting damn close once California and all the absentees are in.
It's 3.15 on Betfair. Following a tip from @Quincel on Twitter a while back I've put a couple of ponies on it.
It feels like it's more like evens.
As an aside, it's worth noting that this will be the second highest vote percentage since 1988; only Obama 2008 did better.
As a percentage of the population, I think this is the best result since Reagan in 1984.0 -
HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Imagine what it would have been like if we didn't hold all the cards...1 -
No I didn't. Farage wasn't on my ballot paper. I voted to get rid of Theresa May and get Brexit done.CorrectHorseBattery said:
You voted for Farage, Jesus.Philip_Thompson said:
I didn't support Farage last May. I voted a protest vote to get rid of Theresa May, I still disliked Farage but took the opportunity to cast a protest vote - as did the overwhelming majority of all Tories you silly fool.HYUFD said:
You voted for Farage's Brexit party last May, the EU may compromise on fishing but the UK will have to compromise on state aid and Boris willPhilip_Thompson said:
There was never going to be a US trade deal either way. Trump couldn't negotiate a US trade deal and get it through a Democrat controlled House anyway.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.
A compromise is the best way out of this and always has been but that entails both parties to compromise, not just one.
I have never supported Farage ever.
About three-quarters of Tory voters voted the same as I did.0 -
CNN - Still 120K outstanding votes in PA. If vast majority are mail-in then Biden will be heading toward 80K0
-
Economic and fiscal conservatives? The idea that the Trump GOP supports a balanced budget is laughable.WhisperingOracle said:
I don't agree here. Reagan captured a wide diversity of people, but the three prongs of his coalition and appeal were the same all over America ; those nostalgic for the moral and national certainties of the 1950s over the 1960s ; the specifically Christian Right ; and the new economic and fiscal conservatives.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yeah yeah, but coming back to the point, your analysis falls over at the very first hurdle: "Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other". No he didn't - not unless you expand your definition of the 'coalition' so far that it becomes completely meaningless: he appealed to lots of voters, urban, suburban and rural, all over the country, some very conservative, many less so, in every state, and particularly to ordinary working Americans.WhisperingOracle said:
Clinton, Blair and Obama were all to a certain extent the fruit of Reaganism and Thatcherism, though. Murdoch did not support Carter, Ford or Callaghan ; his aim was to help end the postwar consensus, and assist the rise both of deregulated and transnational finance capitalism and conservative populism.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a rather selective account of both 49-state-winning Reagan and Obama-supporting Murdoch.WhisperingOracle said:
Without wanting to be rude, as I've been developing the point, it should be fairly obvious by now ; Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, inasmuch as that is true (which isn't much, except that more people have degrees than 50 years ago), what on earth does it have to do with Talk Radio, Fox News, or the opioid crisis?WhisperingOracle said:
Not at all ; but post-Reagan finance-capitalism was in the ascendant, and as in Britain, the "people with finance degrees" , that Carlsson mentions, had far more leverage over every level of society.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think there were no dodgy corporations who risked public safety for profit before Reagan? Really?WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:
Murdoch and some others, including conservative talk radio, were the main cheerleaders for this new coalition and manifesto in the media. What Carlsson is decrying is not only baked into modern American conservatism, but something that his part of the media landscape is specifically historically linked to, too.
0 -
PA presser underway from the Philly mayor
Confirms they will count everything; dismisses Trump’s accusations
Largest no of mail-in ballots in city history
This afternoon US time another 2-3000 votes will be reported
After that, what’s left 40,000 votes will be mostly provisionals, military and overseas
Will take several days to count these
0 -
IndeedOldKingCole said:
What do you reckon Big G; should you & I make a joint offer!TOPPING said:I'm just pondering the 78-yr olds I know.
Not many of them have the energy to do much at all (some of course do). Some are super active, but to be POTUS? Seems a big ask. Although I accept that to be there, Biden was self-selecting in terms of health, fitness, etc.
Edit: I suppose HMQ and the DoE showed that people can be effective up to a great age.0 -
The Philadelphia City commissioner is practising his Oscar acceptance speech. Thanks his family. WTF?0
-
You also need to get rid of Laura Ingraham and Pierero.Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:1 -
Sounding like quite a few votes in PA arent being declared for another day or two, incl some Philly ones. So let's hope enough are declared today to get this done0
-
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.4 -
So here is a question: If Biden wins and Trump throws himself off a tall building or expires from a heart attack, does Pence become the next POTUS until 20th January?0
-
How much money do you think we'll keep paying to the EU, if any?HYUFD said:
As long as he can do that and have a photocall in Grimsby with fish and chips he can spin it as the Great Boris Brexit Deal and move onOnboardG1 said:
If he compromises on State Aid, I think he'll get something back from the EU on fishing. He can wave some cod around and claim victory.ping said:
Good post.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.0 -
This isn't going to be called tonight is it? Sigh.0
-
You're like a whispering oracle sometimes. ☺WhisperingOracle said:
Clinton, Blair and Obama were all to a certain extent the fruit of Reaganism and Thatcherism, though. Murdoch did not support Carter, Ford or Callaghan ; his aim was to assist the end the postwar consensus, and assist the rise both of deregulated and transnational finance capitalism and local conservative populism.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a rather selective account of both 49-state-winning Reagan and Obama-supporting Murdoch.WhisperingOracle said:
Without wanting to be rude, as I've been developing the point, it should be fairly obvious by now ; Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, inasmuch as that is true (which isn't much, except that more people have degrees than 50 years ago), what on earth does it have to do with Talk Radio, Fox News, or the opioid crisis?WhisperingOracle said:
Not at all ; but post-Reagan finance-capitalism was in the ascendant, and as in Britain, the "people with finance degrees" , that Carlsson mentions, had far more leverage over every level of society.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think there were no dodgy corporations who risked public safety for profit before Reagan? Really?WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:
Murdoch and some others, including conservative talk radio, were the main cheerleaders for this new coalition and manifesto in the media. What Carlsson is decrying is not only baked into modern American conservatism, but something that his part of the media landscape is specifically historically linked to, too.1 -
YesNigel_Foremain said:So here is a question: If Biden wins and Trump throws himself off a tall building or expires from a heart attack, does Pence become the next POTUS until 20th January?
0 -
They have a fine line. They never want to be associated with a loser, but they also don't want to upset their base.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
My guess is that they accept Biden has won (and he has won), and find a new champion.
I hope everyone has money on Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas for Next President.0 -
Yes. Doesn't matter for the Betfair market though.Nigel_Foremain said:So here is a question: If Biden wins and Trump throws himself off a tall building or expires from a heart attack, does Pence become the next POTUS until 20th January?
0 -
PA now saying they have 40k plus the military and overseas ballots, saying the latter won’t arrive with them until the 10th0
-
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
To any PBers standing in elections next year, from someone who has worked at many election counts I will say that when making your acceptance/loser speech, don't worry about thanking all the staff in the hall, we won't get offended if you don't and it just gets boring after the 20th time.numbertwelve said:The Philadelphia City commissioner is practising his Oscar acceptance speech. Thanks his family. WTF?
0 -
-
No, but there are degrees of compliance. So they will likely claim that they cannot call the election yet because there are still ballots to be counted, judicial challenges etc. What Fox will NOT want to do is anything that causes Trump to push the button on their business. So they will hold out as long as possible.Philip_Thompson said:
Fox supported Trump at the election.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
If he insists on claiming he has won the election Fox can't possibly support him in that, it isn't true and they are at heart a news agency.
In reality, I would be very surprised if they called the election today.
0 -
Why wouldn't he?Nigel_Foremain said:So here is a question: If Biden wins and Trump throws himself off a tall building or expires from a heart attack, does Pence become the next POTUS until 20th January?
0 -
That takes dancing on the head of a pin to a whole new level! If you voted for someone, of course you supported them, why be embarrassed about it?Philip_Thompson said:
I didn't support Farage last May. I voted a protest vote to get rid of Theresa May, I still disliked Farage but took the opportunity to cast a protest vote - as did the overwhelming majority of all Tories you silly fool.HYUFD said:
You voted for Farage's Brexit party last May, the EU may compromise on fishing but the UK will have to compromise on state aid and Boris willPhilip_Thompson said:
There was never going to be a US trade deal either way. Trump couldn't negotiate a US trade deal and get it through a Democrat controlled House anyway.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.
A compromise is the best way out of this and always has been but that entails both parties to compromise, not just one.
I have never supported Farage ever.2 -
I'm one of your biggest fans here so yes!Malmesbury said:
Why not?TOPPING said:
Why have you added Lagos, San Jose, and Ascension Islands to your charts?Malmesbury said:UK LLTA data
Cases by specimen date
Cases by specimen date scaled to 100k population
R
Do you want the link images full sized then?0 -
That's a very good tip. I am going to put money on now.rcs1000 said:
They have a fine line. They never want to be associated with a loser, but they also don't want to upset their base.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
My guess is that they accept Biden has won (and he has won), and find a new champion.
I hope everyone has money on Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas for Next President.
You can get 50/1 on Meghan Markle at Ladbrokes0 -
Most councils don’t do speeches anyway, there are way too many to make it feasible.kle4 said:
To any PBers standing in elections next year, from someone who has worked at many election counts I will say that when making your acceptance/loser speech, don't worry about thanking all the staff in the hall, we won't get offended if you don't and it just gets boring after the 20th time.numbertwelve said:The Philadelphia City commissioner is practising his Oscar acceptance speech. Thanks his family. WTF?
2 -
Also most of the 40K (these are the remaining Philly votes) wont be declared for at least another day or two. Just a few thousand in Philly being announced later today. At this rate it will be NV and AZ push Biden over the line!! Lets hope enough from other counties to get this declared todayIanB2 said:PA now saying they have 40k plus the military and overseas ballots, saying the latter won’t arrive with them until the 10th
0 -
I reckon Kamala Harris will be the Democratic candidate next time.0
-
PA now Biden 12,4970
-
I don't know if people requested it or something, but the last full one I did there were a fair number at the start, then thankfully it was just announcements.IanB2 said:
Most councils don’t do speeches anyway, there are way too many to make it feasible.kle4 said:
To any PBers standing in elections next year, from someone who has worked at many election counts I will say that when making your acceptance/loser speech, don't worry about thanking all the staff in the hall, we won't get offended if you don't and it just gets boring after the 20th time.numbertwelve said:The Philadelphia City commissioner is practising his Oscar acceptance speech. Thanks his family. WTF?
0 -
BF don't have a book yet as far as I can see.MrEd said:
That's a very good tip. I am going to put money on now.rcs1000 said:
They have a fine line. They never want to be associated with a loser, but they also don't want to upset their base.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
My guess is that they accept Biden has won (and he has won), and find a new champion.
I hope everyone has money on Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas for Next President.
You can get 50/1 on Meghan Markle at Ladbrokes
0 -
Allegheny is the most likely. I suspect.Mal557 said:
Also most of the 40K (these are the remaining Philly votes) wont be declared for at least another day or two. Just a few thousand in Philly being announced later today. At this rate it will be NV and AZ push Biden over the line!! Lets hope enough from other counties to get this declared todayIanB2 said:PA now saying they have 40k plus the military and overseas ballots, saying the latter won’t arrive with them until the 10th
0 -
AZ has already been "called" by several networks so not sure it would necessarily push Biden over the line in the sense that everyone rushes to accept Biden.Mal557 said:
Also most of the 40K (these are the remaining Philly votes) wont be declared for at least another day or two. Just a few thousand in Philly being announced later today. At this rate it will be NV and AZ push Biden over the line!! Lets hope enough from other counties to get this declared todayIanB2 said:PA now saying they have 40k plus the military and overseas ballots, saying the latter won’t arrive with them until the 10th
NV has a Republican SoS. I wonder how long he drags this out0 -
So on surrendering to EU on State Aid, at what point does it start to look a bit BINO?Gallowgate said:HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Imagine what it would have been like if we didn't hold all the cards...0 -
They seem to be confused about what happens in a recount, seeing it as an opportunity to identify voting fraud. Whereas it's just a recount.kle4 said:
The man is obsessed with Fox News calling Arizona. Seriously, what's his beef?bigjohnowls said:FoxLiveBlogTeam
42 seconds ago
The Trump campaign has released a statement:
“This election is not over. The false projection of Joe Biden as the winner is based on results in four states that are far from final. Georgia is headed for a recount, where we are confident we will find ballots improperly harvested, and where President Trump will ultimately prevail," - Matt Morgan, Trump 2020 campaign general counsel, said.
"There were many irregularities in Pennsylvania, including having election officials prevent our volunteer legal observers from having meaningful access to vote counting locations. We prevailed in court on our challenge, but were deprived of valuable time and denied the transparency we are entitled to under state law. In Nevada, there appear to be thousands of individuals who improperly cast mail ballots. Finally, the President is on course to win Arizona outright, despite the irresponsible and erroneous ‘calling’ of the state for Biden by Fox News and the Associated Press. Biden is relying on these states for his phony claim on the White House, but once the election is final, President Trump will be re-elected.”0 -
Reagan blew out the deficit too. The idea was to cut taxes first, and then spending would have to fall too. They even had a name for it - starving the beast. Fiscal conservatism has for a long time meant low taxes and a small state, not a balanced budget. Especially in the US, where the power of the USD means that there will always be a global demand for US government debt.No_Offence_Alan said:
Economic and fiscal conservatives? The idea that the Trump GOP supports a balanced budget is laughable.WhisperingOracle said:
I don't agree here. Reagan captured a wide diversity of people, but the three prongs of his coalition and appeal were the same all over America ; those nostalgic for the moral and national certainties of the 1950s over the 1960s ; the specifically Christian Right ; and the new economic and fiscal conservatives.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yeah yeah, but coming back to the point, your analysis falls over at the very first hurdle: "Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other". No he didn't - not unless you expand your definition of the 'coalition' so far that it becomes completely meaningless: he appealed to lots of voters, urban, suburban and rural, all over the country, some very conservative, many less so, in every state, and particularly to ordinary working Americans.WhisperingOracle said:
Clinton, Blair and Obama were all to a certain extent the fruit of Reaganism and Thatcherism, though. Murdoch did not support Carter, Ford or Callaghan ; his aim was to help end the postwar consensus, and assist the rise both of deregulated and transnational finance capitalism and conservative populism.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a rather selective account of both 49-state-winning Reagan and Obama-supporting Murdoch.WhisperingOracle said:
Without wanting to be rude, as I've been developing the point, it should be fairly obvious by now ; Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, inasmuch as that is true (which isn't much, except that more people have degrees than 50 years ago), what on earth does it have to do with Talk Radio, Fox News, or the opioid crisis?WhisperingOracle said:
Not at all ; but post-Reagan finance-capitalism was in the ascendant, and as in Britain, the "people with finance degrees" , that Carlsson mentions, had far more leverage over every level of society.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think there were no dodgy corporations who risked public safety for profit before Reagan? Really?WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:
Murdoch and some others, including conservative talk radio, were the main cheerleaders for this new coalition and manifesto in the media. What Carlsson is decrying is not only baked into modern American conservatism, but something that his part of the media landscape is specifically historically linked to, too.3 -
I meant more if there arent enough votes called today in PA, bearing in mind 75K votes in PA in total (Alig and Philli counties) arent being called til tomorrow so wondered if AZ and NV might be called (by all media) before then, who knows,,,,Bidens acceptance speech might not be til next week at this rate lolMrEd said:
AZ has already been "called" by several networks so not sure it would necessarily push Biden over the line in the sense that everyone rushes to accept Biden.Mal557 said:
Also most of the 40K (these are the remaining Philly votes) wont be declared for at least another day or two. Just a few thousand in Philly being announced later today. At this rate it will be NV and AZ push Biden over the line!! Lets hope enough from other counties to get this declared todayIanB2 said:PA now saying they have 40k plus the military and overseas ballots, saying the latter won’t arrive with them until the 10th
NV has a Republican SoS. I wonder how long he drags this out0 -
Yeah, really frustrating. Betfair are also bad at listing potential candidates.rottenborough said:
BF don't have a book yet as far as I can see.MrEd said:
That's a very good tip. I am going to put money on now.rcs1000 said:
They have a fine line. They never want to be associated with a loser, but they also don't want to upset their base.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
My guess is that they accept Biden has won (and he has won), and find a new champion.
I hope everyone has money on Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas for Next President.
You can get 50/1 on Meghan Markle at Ladbrokes
You'd expect, at the very least they'd list all senators and governors as runners but they don't.0 -
Actually your 269-269 forecast is not going to be that far out.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK2 -
If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.0
-
Difficult to say what the GOP's chances will be against Harris 4 years out.HYUFD said:
Maybe but I think the GOP would fancy their chances against her and if Biden does not run again I expect Buttigieg and AOC at least to challenge Harris for the Democratic nominationAndy_JS said:I reckon Kamala Harris will be the Democratic candidate next time.
0 -
Obamacare gets repealed next week as well. Just as Georgia's third wave starts.
Incredible timing. I think Dems take the Senate (not by Betfair's rules!)0 -
I think elements of the Right are totally mad already. But Biden won't do a whole lot to rock the boat. If he has any idea what he actually wants to do as President he's kept it pretty quiet so far.Stark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.1 -
In the Dems take the Senate then revenge is on the menu.DavidL said:
I think elements of the Right are totally mad already. But Biden won't do a whole lot to rock the boat. If he has any idea what he actually wants to do as President he's kept it pretty quiet so far.Stark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
You think Georgia will elect 2 Dem senators? Seems unlikely.Alistair said:Obamacare gets repealed next week as well. Just as Georgia's third wave starts.
Incredible timing. I think Dems take the Senate (not by Betfair's rules!)0 -
...
Farage will probably use whatever deal is struck as ammo to complain it isnt good enough/not real Brexit, allied to his newfound anti lockdown views that probably suits him better,.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
I guess being associated with a Trump campaign that lost is a negative, although maybe he will go with "Establishment con" and use it as more outsider material1 -
They won't though. 48-52 is most likely, possibly 49-51 depending on the run offs. The Democrats will rarely have a better set of seats than this to contest and they must be seriously disappointed about the Senate. Going backwards in the House wasn't great either.Alistair said:
In the Dems take the Senate then revenge is on the menu.DavidL said:
I think elements of the Right are totally mad already. But Biden won't do a whole lot to rock the boat. If he has any idea what he actually wants to do as President he's kept it pretty quiet so far.Stark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
OMG such a lazy stereotype! Men are assertive, but women are "feisty"Roger said:
I imagine she'll be used for other things than attending the funerals of foreign leaders. She strikes me as a real feisty human being.Andy_JS said:I reckon Kamala Harris will be the Democratic candidate next time.
Maybe she'll be used to meet minor leaders Johnson.
Typical pale, stale, male!2 -
While that's true, you can usually construct a path where someone isn't more than 250,000 votes away from victory (so long as the votes are all in exactly the right place).Andy_JS said:If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.
Biden will have won the popular vote by a little more than 4%, and got a higher percentage than any other President other than Obama I in the post 1988 era. He'll have topped 300 electoral college votes.
It's also worth noting that Republican Senators - with the exceptions of Martha McSally and Mitch McConnell* - have outpolled the President, often pretty handily. That won't have gone unnoticed.
* Does anyone else find it suspicious that the only two underperformers have the same initials?0 -
You can lay her for 1/50MrEd said:
That's a very good tip. I am going to put money on now.rcs1000 said:
They have a fine line. They never want to be associated with a loser, but they also don't want to upset their base.MrEd said:
At a guess, I would expect Fox to not fight Trump but rather choose to support him. The risk to their business model is too great. Plus they will never get any plaudits for tacking to the left.Scott_xP said:
My guess is that they accept Biden has won (and he has won), and find a new champion.
I hope everyone has money on Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas for Next President.
You can get 50/1 on Meghan Markle at Ladbrokes
1 -
So it seems about 120K left in PA, 75K of them in two counties (Ala and Phili) won't be declared until tomorrow the counting centre managers said. So of the other 45K left if they are all declared if Biden gets say 80% of them thats a net gain of another 27K to what he has now, is that enough to declare the state and put this damn thing to bed today?
0 -
As per the Tucker Carlson clip he can still play his anti-ruling class angle.isam said:...
Farage will probably use whatever deal is struck as ammo to complain it isnt good enough/not real Brexit, allied to his newfound anti lockdown views that probably suits him better,.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
I guess being associated with a Trump campaign that lost is a negative, although maybe he will go with "Establishment con" and use it as more outsider material0 -
An election winning genius with a unique bond with the people. IIRCEPG said:
30,000 wasn't too close for comfort for Trump in 2016.Andy_JS said:If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.
1 -
I have seen it suggested that the Illinois result did not prove decisive in 1960 - ie that Kennedy would still have won the Electoral College without it.MrEd said:
One thing we forget over here is the extent to which suspicious practices happen in the States and how they have seriously impacted elections. The result in one Presidential election (1960) was very likely determined by voter fraud (Mayor Daley adding the votes in Cook County) and it's being a problem at various levels. Ironically, one of the major reasons why Hillary could not get a recount in Michigan in 2016 was that state law forbids any precinct being included in the recount where the turnout exceeds the number of registered voters, which was exactly the situation in many of Detroit's precincts (the explanation given at the time was that many of the machines broke down on election day and the scanners, where votes were fed into, may have mistakenly counted ballots twice).numbertwelve said:
Ahh, the old "the dead have voted" schtick. The oldest moan in the book.TheScreamingEagles said:Farage really is a nob.
https://twitter.com/KuperSimon/status/1324655853266522112
If only he had checked out this thread.
https://twitter.com/Ike_Saul/status/1324435797374808066
So before everyone rushes off and says that these are all nut jobs who can't accept defeat, it's worthwhile putting into in the context of what has gone on previously.
And, no, that is not me trying to say "it's rigged!" but it is me trying to explain why many of the establishment Republican politicians are not calling out Trump on this and why, generally so far, the Republican establishment seem behind him.
It's also why this whole saga is likely to drag out.0 -
Even I voted for the Brexit Party in May 2019! Strange, but true!isam said:
That takes dancing on the head of a pin to a whole new level! If you voted for someone, of course you supported them, why be embarrassed about it?Philip_Thompson said:
I didn't support Farage last May. I voted a protest vote to get rid of Theresa May, I still disliked Farage but took the opportunity to cast a protest vote - as did the overwhelming majority of all Tories you silly fool.HYUFD said:
You voted for Farage's Brexit party last May, the EU may compromise on fishing but the UK will have to compromise on state aid and Boris willPhilip_Thompson said:
There was never going to be a US trade deal either way. Trump couldn't negotiate a US trade deal and get it through a Democrat controlled House anyway.HYUFD said:
Face it, No Deal is dead without a US trade deal in the offing as a ready made alternative, you are of course welcome to move back to Farage in his new party of Reform UK once the deal terms are agreed and that will only be at minimum with Boris accepting most of the EU terms on state aid which he will likely do by Christmas, with fishing talks still kicked into next year.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm surprised you've not fallen for QAnon yet. Just because you've read something somewhere doesn't make it right.HYUFD said:
My final forecast was 269 269.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes and Trump will be next President because Trafalgar . . .HYUFD said:
Yep, Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid and kick fishing talks into the long grass now Biden is almost certain of victory, No Deal is dead with Trump's defeat, he may even pull the internal markets bill to keep open the possibility of a FTA with a Biden administrationScott_xP said:
Will you ever cool down your absolute certainty that you know what's happening next?
We know full well Boris was waiting for the US election results to decide whether to risk No Deal which he could only ever do with a Trump re election as Trump had not openly opposed the Internal Markets Bill and had indeed openly pushed the UK to go to No Deal Brexit.
With a Biden win Boris will agree to accept the EU's terms on state aid as he cannot afford no trade deal with the US and the EU and also as he will either have to dilute the impact of the Internal Markets Bill with an EU FTA or withdraw it completely to have any prospect of a trade deal with a Biden and Pelosi led US.
As Sir Ivan Rogers former UK ambassador to the EU has said Rogers said: “Several very senior sources in capitals have told me they believe Johnson will await clarity on the presidential election result before finally deciding whether to jump to ‘no deal’ with the EU, or to conclude that this is just too risky with Biden heading for the White House, and hence live with some highly suboptimal (for Johnson) skinny free-trade agreement.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/oct/24/johnson-will-wait-for-us-election-result-before-no-deal-brexit-decision
The US result is not only a defeat for Trump but also for his key British backer Farage and No Deal, anti lockdown Brexiteers in the UK
The US Presidential Election was never more than tangential to this, it was always going to require a political compromise for the big outstanding issues. A meeting between Johnson and Von Der Leyen to see if they can reach a compromise was going to be required either way.
The question that's not been answered is whether a compromise is achievable. I think so. But if people arrogantly believe that a Biden victory means the EU don't need to compromise that risks making a No Deal Brexit more likely not less. Both parties need to compromise, it is as simple as that.
A compromise is the best way out of this and always has been but that entails both parties to compromise, not just one.
I have never supported Farage ever.0 -
Really? My understanding was that this was actually a very tough year for the Democrats in the Senate.DavidL said:
They won't though. 48-52 is most likely, possibly 49-51 depending on the run offs. The Democrats will rarely have a better set of seats than this to contest and they must be seriously disappointed about the Senate. Going backwards in the House wasn't great either.Alistair said:
In the Dems take the Senate then revenge is on the menu.DavidL said:
I think elements of the Right are totally mad already. But Biden won't do a whole lot to rock the boat. If he has any idea what he actually wants to do as President he's kept it pretty quiet so far.Stark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
Can you shed any light on why McSally got a second oppertunity to lose a Senate seat?rcs1000 said:
While that's true, you can usually construct a path where someone isn't more than 250,000 votes away from victory (so long as the votes are all in exactly the right place).Andy_JS said:If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.
Biden will have won the popular vote by a little more than 4%, and got a higher percentage than any other President other than Obama I in the post 1988 era. He'll have topped 300 electoral college votes.
It's also worth noting that Republican Senators - with the exceptions of Martha McSally and Mitch McConnell* - have outpolled the President, often pretty handily. That won't have gone unnoticed.
* Does anyone else find it suspicious that the only two underperformers have the same initials?0 -
NV presser updating on counting progress. Somewhat confused but appears to be, not much.
NV confirm several GOP lawsuits have been filed; breaking: DNC intervening arguing GOP cases are filed too late and are groundless
NV aiming to finish by Nov 12th0 -
I predict that for the GOP 2 issues will be absolutely scandalous problems after January.OnlyLivingBoy said:
Reagan blew out the deficit too. The idea was to cut taxes first, and then spending would have to fall too. They even had a name for it - starving the beast. Fiscal conservatism has for a long time meant low taxes and a small state, not a balanced budget. Especially in the US, where the power of the USD means that there will always be a global demand for US government debt.No_Offence_Alan said:
Economic and fiscal conservatives? The idea that the Trump GOP supports a balanced budget is laughable.WhisperingOracle said:
I don't agree here. Reagan captured a wide diversity of people, but the three prongs of his coalition and appeal were the same all over America ; those nostalgic for the moral and national certainties of the 1950s over the 1960s ; the specifically Christian Right ; and the new economic and fiscal conservatives.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yeah yeah, but coming back to the point, your analysis falls over at the very first hurdle: "Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other". No he didn't - not unless you expand your definition of the 'coalition' so far that it becomes completely meaningless: he appealed to lots of voters, urban, suburban and rural, all over the country, some very conservative, many less so, in every state, and particularly to ordinary working Americans.WhisperingOracle said:
Clinton, Blair and Obama were all to a certain extent the fruit of Reaganism and Thatcherism, though. Murdoch did not support Carter, Ford or Callaghan ; his aim was to help end the postwar consensus, and assist the rise both of deregulated and transnational finance capitalism and conservative populism.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's a rather selective account of both 49-state-winning Reagan and Obama-supporting Murdoch.WhisperingOracle said:
Without wanting to be rude, as I've been developing the point, it should be fairly obvious by now ; Reagan built a new conservative coalition, which included two major centres : Wall St and the advocates of financial deregulation and fiscal conservatism on the one hand, and religious-conservatives and national-populists, often locally minded, on the other.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, inasmuch as that is true (which isn't much, except that more people have degrees than 50 years ago), what on earth does it have to do with Talk Radio, Fox News, or the opioid crisis?WhisperingOracle said:
Not at all ; but post-Reagan finance-capitalism was in the ascendant, and as in Britain, the "people with finance degrees" , that Carlsson mentions, had far more leverage over every level of society.Richard_Nabavi said:
So you think there were no dodgy corporations who risked public safety for profit before Reagan? Really?WhisperingOracle said:
Some good points, but the "half-wits with finance degrees who run everything" , and don't care about the opioid crisis in post-industrial towns, are the exact fruit of the New Right and Reaganism, not the east and west coast "liberal elite" that Fox so professes to despise. In fact the same Reaganite-populist alliance, tied to Wall St, gave birth to Fox News and talk radio. America's cultural amnesia and confusion is truly appalling.Casino_Royale said:
An awful lot of truth in that.Andy_JS said:
Murdoch and some others, including conservative talk radio, were the main cheerleaders for this new coalition and manifesto in the media. What Carlsson is decrying is not only baked into modern American conservatism, but something that his part of the media landscape is specifically historically linked to, too.
The outrageous death rate from the pandemic. And the utterly unsustainable deficit.0 -
2022 is a wayyyyy better set of seats.DavidL said:
They won't though. 48-52 is most likely, possibly 49-51 depending on the run offs. The Democrats will rarely have a better set of seats than this to contest and they must be seriously disappointed about the Senate. Going backwards in the House wasn't great either.Alistair said:
In the Dems take the Senate then revenge is on the menu.DavidL said:
I think elements of the Right are totally mad already. But Biden won't do a whole lot to rock the boat. If he has any idea what he actually wants to do as President he's kept it pretty quiet so far.Stark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
Are you implying they are chocolate candidates?rcs1000 said:
While that's true, you can usually construct a path where someone isn't more than 250,000 votes away from victory (so long as the votes are all in exactly the right place).Andy_JS said:If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.
Biden will have won the popular vote by a little more than 4%, and got a higher percentage than any other President other than Obama I in the post 1988 era. He'll have topped 300 electoral college votes.
It's also worth noting that Republican Senators - with the exceptions of Martha McSally and Mitch McConnell* - have outpolled the President, often pretty handily. That won't have gone unnoticed.
* Does anyone else find it suspicious that the only two underperformers have the same initials?
0 -
Have North Carolina actually been counting any votes since Tuesday? They certainly haven't been reporting any. Could we suddenly find in a few days that they still had significant number of votes left and they announce them all at once and Biden wins?
I think what a lot of people haven't really appreciated in all this, is that it is extremely unusual in US Presidential elections for the winners not to be agreed until all the votes are counted. There are all these complaints about how slowly states are counting votes, but all they are doing is what they always do.
Normally they count enough for the result to be called by the networks on the night or shortly after, and then wind their way towards the certification deadline at a leisurely pace. And they simply have barely changed their processes for the new situation.
I think i'm right in thinking that on election date and for many days after it was assumed that New Hampshire had been won by Trump. It was only much later that Clinton finally overhauled him. Arguably the belief that she had lost it on election night probably changed some of the perception of the situation on the night and she might not have conceded so quickly if it hadn't.0 -
This rersult is a bit of a setback for your theory that charisma beats boring, isn't it? Perhaps like most theories it can be true up to a point but there's an extreme where it breaks down.isam said:
OMG such a lazy stereotype! Men are assertive, but women are "feisty"Roger said:
I imagine she'll be used for other things than attending the funerals of foreign leaders. She strikes me as a real feisty human being.Andy_JS said:I reckon Kamala Harris will be the Democratic candidate next time.
Maybe she'll be used to meet minor leaders Johnson.
Typical pale, stale, male!1 -
Joe can carry on quietly establishing his transition and letting the Republicans squirm between backing and betraying the Orange One.Mal557 said:So it seems about 120K left in PA, 75K of them in two counties (Ala and Phili) won't be declared until tomorrow the counting centre managers said. So of the other 45K left if they are all declared if Biden gets say 80% of them thats a net gain of another 27K to what he has now, is that enough to declare the state and put this damn thing to bed today?
There's the best part of three months until it becomes important, but you'd have to have a minimal grip on reality to not know how this ends up.
The minimal grip on reality thing is the problem, of course.0 -
-
edit0
-
Trump isn't going to be on the ballot for the runoffs but Stacey Abrahams will still be in Georgia.DavidL said:
They won't though. 48-52 is most likely, possibly 49-51 depending on the run offs. The Democrats will rarely have a better set of seats than this to contest and they must be seriously disappointed about the Senate. Going backwards in the House wasn't great either.Alistair said:
In the Dems take the Senate then revenge is on the menu.DavidL said:
I think elements of the Right are totally mad already. But Biden won't do a whole lot to rock the boat. If he has any idea what he actually wants to do as President he's kept it pretty quiet so far.Stark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
Yes. It means Hannity has failedStark_Dawning said:
I think elements of the Right are going to be driven totally mad by a Biden victory.DavidL said:
I saw Hannity earlier today. It was remarkable. Each guest was invited to consider what could be done about the law being broken. The law in question was partisan observation of the count. Not happening he said repeatedly. Except when it was happening from a distance of 100 feet (well actually 6 feet according to the court case, but who's counting).Philip_Thompson said:
A Fox without Hannity and Carlson would be a much more sane Fox.Scott_xP said:
Why a republican administration in Georgia was a party to this conspiracy was totally ignored. The fact that this showed exactly the same trend as we saw in Pennsylvania there totally ignored. It was incitement to violence and taking the law into your own hands. It was a disgrace.0 -
Yup. It’s a feature of FPTnP that some votes count a lot more than others. Hence you can usually identify a tiny subset of votes that, if changed, would switch the result. But the change in nationwide circumstances that might have changed those votes would have swung a lot of others. Therefore these “only X thousand votes decided the election” statements are strictly true, but in practice highly misleading.rcs1000 said:
While that's true, you can usually construct a path where someone isn't more than 250,000 votes away from victory (so long as the votes are all in exactly the right place).Andy_JS said:If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.
Biden will have won the popular vote by a little more than 4%, and got a higher percentage than any other President other than Obama I in the post 1988 era. He'll have topped 300 electoral college votes.
It's also worth noting that Republican Senators - with the exceptions of Martha McSally and Mitch McConnell* - have outpolled the President, often pretty handily. That won't have gone unnoticed.
* Does anyone else find it suspicious that the only two underperformers have the same initials?0 -
PA lady should have had the number of segregated ballots to hand I think. Unless they're just being kept in a box somewhere to be counted dead last and they don't know the number. Perhaps that's the case.0
-
3 Supreme Court justices and a big tax cut was incredibly efficient on a 2% popular vote loss,Andy_JS said:2 -
CNN are painting a picture of a WH in complete disarray right now. People desperately looking for new jobs, people tiptoeing round the president and trying to manage him while he sits by the TV and complains how no-one is supporting him. Mark Meadows apparently being 'unhelpful' by feeding Trump's delusions.0
-
Worth noting the North Carolina Senate and Presidential races both have very similar vote margins. There's therefore a small chance that Mr Tills will also be looking for a new job.alex_ said:Have North Carolina actually been counting any votes since Tuesday? They certainly haven't been reporting any. Could we suddenly find in a few days that they still had significant number of votes left and they announce them all at once and Biden wins?
I think what a lot of people haven't really appreciated in all this, is that it is extremely unusual in US Presidential elections for the winners not to be agreed until all the votes are counted. There are all these complaints about how slowly states are counting votes, but all they are doing is what they always do.
Normally they count enough for the result to be called by the networks on the night or shortly after, and then wind their way towards the certification deadline at a leisurely pace. And they simply have barely changed their processes for the new situation.
I think i'm right in thinking that on election date and for many days after it was assumed that New Hampshire had been won by Trump. It was only much later that Clinton finally overhauled him. Arguably the belief that she had lost it on election night probably changed some of the perception of the situation on the night and she might not have conceded so quickly if it hadn't.0 -
And yet we still haven't had a good Downfall parody yet. The ones I've seen have been deeply mediocre.numbertwelve said:CNN are painting a picture of a WH in complete disarray right now. People desperately looking for new jobs, people tiptoeing round the president and trying to manage him while he sits by the TV and complains how no-one is supporting him. Mark Meadows apparently being 'unhelpful' by feeding Trump's delusions.
0 -
I think Biden is quite charismatic actually, certainly more so than Romney, Kerry, Dole or Mondale who are the last candidates who took on incumbent Presidents and lost unlike him, even if he may not be up to Clinton and Reagan levels of charismaNickPalmer said:
This rersult is a bit of a setback for your theory that charisma beats boring, isn't it? Perhaps like most theories it can be true up to a point but there's an extreme where it breaks down.isam said:
OMG such a lazy stereotype! Men are assertive, but women are "feisty"Roger said:
I imagine she'll be used for other things than attending the funerals of foreign leaders. She strikes me as a real feisty human being.Andy_JS said:I reckon Kamala Harris will be the Democratic candidate next time.
Maybe she'll be used to meet minor leaders Johnson.
Typical pale, stale, male!0 -
He's very stable too, I'm told.Alistair said:
An election winning genius with a unique bond with the people. IIRCEPG said:
30,000 wasn't too close for comfort for Trump in 2016.Andy_JS said:If the eventual result is that Trump is/was within 100,000 switchers of winning the electoral college, that'll have been far too close for comfort for the Democrats, although of course a win is a win.
0
This discussion has been closed.