Two warnings for Johnson in today’s YouGov poll – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
California seems to be a centre of do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do politicians:FrancisUrquhart said:
California Governor Gavin Newsom last month apologised after he was caught dining with lobbyists and members of the California Medical Association, all without masks, at a crowded table for 12 in a swanky restaurant in Napa Valley.
He initially claimed the meal at the Michelin-starred French Laundry, where some prix fixe plates go for $450 per person, took place outdoors. But photos emerged showing the space had a roof, three walls and another wall with sliding glass doors.
This week Mr Newsom warned he was considering "dramatic, arguably drastic" stay-at-home orders to tackle surging coronavirus caseload in the state.
It has since emerged that one night after Mr Newsom dined at the French Laundry, San Francisco Mayor London Breed attended a birthday party for a socialite at the same restaurant.
The meal took place as Ms Breed was urging residents to stay at home and avoid socialising, reports the San Francisco Chronicle.
In other recent cases involving Democrats:
On Tuesday, the mayor of San Jose, California, Sam Liccardo, apologised for attending a Thanksgiving dinner with family members from five households - more than state regulations allowed
A delegation of California lawmakers jetted off to a resort in Maui, Hawaii, for a conference with lobbyists as state residents were being instructed to avoid nonessential travel
California Senator Dianne Feinstein - who has called for congressional coronavirus aid to be made conditional on states imposing mask mandates - was photographed at the US Capitol and at an airport without any face-covering
US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, also of California, was pictured without a mask inside a hair salon, breaking rules that only allow service outdoors, but she refused to apologise
Los Angeles County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl dined outdoors at her favourite restaurant — shortly after voting to uphold a ban on outdoor dining, which she said endangered serving staff
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-551686341 -
I see the Trumpton fantasists are back for more.
LOL..0 -
Lorry driver regulations were only introduced a few years ago. My company at the time were hit by it and my colleagues on the road were irritated by it and not keen on the changes at the time.Beibheirli_C said:
Time to return to pre EEC/EU working practices. Another Brexit "benefit" ....Scott_xP said:
I don't particularly care either way but it's not exactly sending chimney sweeps up.0 -
Credulous certainly.williamglenn said:
Poor is the man whose Britishness depends on the indulgence of the Tory party.Theuniondivvie said:
Diminished Britishness apparently.another_richard said:Have the DUP said anything about yesterday's border check agreement ?
Normally we get the pavlovian 'Ulster says NO' response.0 -
It's a school night put the drink away . . .LadyG said:
Fuck them. Really, fuck them. I WANT No Deal now.CarlottaVance said:Wonder if this will finally push the UK into doing what it should have done 9 months ago
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336777195755360257?s=20
They have totally overplayed their hand, they think we will submit, we will not submit, we are Britain, fuck em all. We are superior to them and we have never been Nazis and they are evil.0 -
https://twitter.com/timothypmurphy/status/1336775766995038215?s=19
He's also under investigation for federal crimes. Crimes that Trump could pardon him for.0 -
I think that is probably bollocks. The Institute of Medicine and the National Academies of Science in the US did a study on Vitamin D about 10 years ago that basically said that as little as 5 minutes outside in daylight is enough for a normal person to create sufficient VitD regardless of skin colour. It resulted in a change in recommendations to healthcare professionals, IIRC.Gallowgate said:
I don't have a source, but it's what various doctors have told me over the years. It doesn't matter what colour skin people have if they spend most of the day indoors.turbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.0 -
Yes, and possibly a bigger issue with supplements is that synthetic vitamins usually have issues with absorbability and usability. Ascorbic acid (synthetic vitamin C) is not the same anti-oxidant mix you would get from a fruit, so it's unlikely to work the same.turbotubbs said:
Vitamin d is quite tricky to supplement too. It’s not clear that giving vit d actually increases levels. Like so much in biology it’s really complex. Homeostasis plays a huge role in setting levels of just about everything in the body, and supplements are often just making expensive urine and excreta.Luckyguy1983 said:
Likewise the other two, but we don't yet have that much of a plan for what to do about it, and trends in diet (away from meat and dairy, toward vegetarianism, or worse, veganism) exacerbate the issue.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
What we really need to do is to assess which vitamins and minerals are needed, and grow them into our produce and livestock before we eat it/them/their products. It's actually not massively difficult to do. But so far, it's far away from what policy makers are thinking about.0 -
About a quarter to a third, https://www.guidelinesinpractice.co.uk/nutrition/top-tips-vitamin-d-deficiency/454118.articleGallowgate said:
I don't have a source, but it's what various doctors have told me over the years. It doesn't matter what colour skin people have if they spend most of the day indoors.turbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.0 -
-
Do lesbian newt painters go to school?Philip_Thompson said:
It's a school night put the drink away . . .LadyG said:
Fuck them. Really, fuck them. I WANT No Deal now.CarlottaVance said:Wonder if this will finally push the UK into doing what it should have done 9 months ago
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336777195755360257?s=20
They have totally overplayed their hand, they think we will submit, we will not submit, we are Britain, fuck em all. We are superior to them and we have never been Nazis and they are evil.0 -
Hope so. I haven't eaten meat since the cows went mad.Foxy said:
Sunshine doesn't seem to stop lots of people dying in Florida, Texas, Iran, India etc etcturbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
There is lots of Zinc in nuts and seeds. Vegetarians are not zinc deficient. Indeed there is reasonable evidence that being vegetarian is significantly life extending, and healthy years too.0 -
This is why the EU so overreacted to us approving the vaccine "early".MaxPB said:
I think lots of EU countries are making their own plans. I've read about Germany, Spain and Italy already, this add Poland. Hungary are also signed up to buy the no booze Russian one but they might bail out of that now.FrancisUrquhart said:
From what I can tell the countries are getting frustrated on the lack of detail over delivery schedules and expected capacity. I think they're looking over the channel wondering why it's all happening late for a vaccine developed by a German company and manufactured in Belgium.
They see us as a bad influence on European solidarity.2 -
Personally I'm waiting for another rendition of "Covid is over in the United States"
The classics are the best, this modern "Elections are Rigged" is boring and repetitive.0 -
I think they'll just give it a one line dismissal: their argument will be that States are free to choose their own methods for appointing electors, and that Texas has no standing to bring a case. (I.e. a Wisconsinite can say that the method of appointing electors breaches their rights, but an individual politician from Texas cannot.)MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.0 -
The source for that claim doesn't go anywhere...turbotubbs said:
About a quarter to a third, https://www.guidelinesinpractice.co.uk/nutrition/top-tips-vitamin-d-deficiency/454118.articleGallowgate said:
I don't have a source, but it's what various doctors have told me over the years. It doesn't matter what colour skin people have if they spend most of the day indoors.turbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
However as with anything when it comes to nutrition, some scientists think that our standard "normal" level is actually far too low.1 -
This is such nonsense. Texas -- its officials, electors, or electorate -- have not been harmed by how other states conducted their election. Nor have the other states joining. "X violated the constitution" is not a harm to Texas. They cannot sue, as they cannot be awarded a remedy.contrarian said:
That is not the distinction as I understand it.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
The distinction is that the mail in rules of Florida, Utah, North Carolina and others were made by the legislatures of those states. The rules of the states being sued were at least partially made by officials and not by legislatures. The constitution explicitly states that election rules must be made by legislatures and not by officials, or indeed courts.
Texas et all are claiming the sued states violated the constitution in framing their election rules. And that therefore those elections are unconstitutional.
It's all noise and bluster from sore losers. Embarrassing.
--AS1 -
Agreed. It is now too late though that is not going to stop the Trumpsters trying anything just to keep this current.TimT said:
Surely, under the law, it is now too late for even that, as safe harbor has passed.contrarian said:
That's a good point, but in upholding the Texas claim, the Supreme Court would not be overturning the result of the election.Mexicanpete said:
It would be more worrying if SCOTUS overturns the election. It was as safe an election as the USA have ever had,contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
if in the unlikely event SCOTUS were to hand it to Trump, what happens next? Civil war, key Democrats executed for treason, martial law, summary execution of protesters by the military and the police, what else? It would be American carnage.
Trump probably hasn't seen past his "win".
They would merely be ruling the election in four states unconstitutional, and returning the power to choose electors in those four states to their legislatures.
(I think!).1 -
Once again (and I bore even myself).rottenborough said:
If SCOTUS overturns it then America is over as a federation of states. How many pieces it will split into and how bad the violence will be in the process is anyone's guess.Mexicanpete said:
It would be more worrying if SCOTUS overturns the election. It was as safe an election as the USA have ever had,contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
if in the unlikely event SCOTUS were to hand it to Trump, what happens next? Civil war, key Democrats executed for treason, martial law, summary execution of protesters by the military and the police, what else? It would be American carnage.
Trump probably hasn't seen past his "win".
AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.
This forum is beyond ridicule at times.1 -
I wonder if there's going to be a meaningful readout tonight or if it will be a holding message and nothing new until the EU Council meeting tomorrow etc ?0
-
https://cks.nice.org.uk/topics/vitamin-d-deficiency-in-adults-treatment-prevention/Gallowgate said:
The source for that claim doesn't go anywhere...turbotubbs said:
About a quarter to a third, https://www.guidelinesinpractice.co.uk/nutrition/top-tips-vitamin-d-deficiency/454118.articleGallowgate said:
I don't have a source, but it's what various doctors have told me over the years. It doesn't matter what colour skin people have if they spend most of the day indoors.turbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
However as with anything when it comes to nutrition, some scientists think that our standard "normal" level is actually far too low.0 -
Having darker skin does affect vitamin D absorption. Of course exposure matters too. Asian women who adopt modest dress are often particularly hard hit.Gallowgate said:
I don't have a source, but it's what various doctors have told me over the years. It doesn't matter what colour skin people have if they spend most of the day indoors.turbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.1 -
I thought there was no Brexit discussion on the agenda for the meeting tomorrow?Philip_Thompson said:I wonder if there's going to be a meaningful readout tonight or if it will be a holding message and nothing new until the EU Council meeting tomorrow etc ?
0 -
You shouldn't have long to wait now. Just a day or two more of Johnson's clowning antics and then it'll be clear we have no deal.LadyG said:
Fuck them. Really, fuck them. I WANT No Deal now.CarlottaVance said:Wonder if this will finally push the UK into doing what it should have done 9 months ago
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336777195755360257?s=20
They have totally overplayed their hand, they think we will submit, we will not submit, we are Britain, fuck em all. We are superior to them and we have never been Nazis and they are evil.0 -
“ratchet” clause to ensure that as one side upgrades its standards, the other is not able to enjoy a competitive advantage.Philip_Thompson said:
Lorry driver regulations were only introduced a few years ago. My company at the time were hit by it and my colleagues on the road were irritated by it and not keen on the changes at the time.Beibheirli_C said:
Time to return to pre EEC/EU working practices. Another Brexit "benefit" ....Scott_xP said:
I don't particularly care either way but it's not exactly sending chimney sweeps up.
What is the point of brexit if you accept ratchet clause? On feet in commons claiming take back control would be hollow? Canada + ratchet clause would be worst of all worlds BINO.
Boris is right, he can’t sign that clause, it’s not a brexit the nation voted for, not one he could convince voters back home delivers take back control. EU have to surrender or we give them the full Australian.1 -
I think he's already been putting too much drink away tbh.Philip_Thompson said:
It's a school night put the drink away . . .LadyG said:
Fuck them. Really, fuck them. I WANT No Deal now.CarlottaVance said:Wonder if this will finally push the UK into doing what it should have done 9 months ago
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336777195755360257?s=20
They have totally overplayed their hand, they think we will submit, we will not submit, we are Britain, fuck em all. We are superior to them and we have never been Nazis and they are evil.3 -
I thought safe harbour date was the day the court cases need to be filed by, not the day they need to be resolved by?MikeSmithson said:
Agreed. It is now too late though that is not going to stop the Trumpsters trying anything just to keep this current.TimT said:
Surely, under the law, it is now too late for even that, as safe harbor has passed.contrarian said:
That's a good point, but in upholding the Texas claim, the Supreme Court would not be overturning the result of the election.Mexicanpete said:
It would be more worrying if SCOTUS overturns the election. It was as safe an election as the USA have ever had,contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
if in the unlikely event SCOTUS were to hand it to Trump, what happens next? Civil war, key Democrats executed for treason, martial law, summary execution of protesters by the military and the police, what else? It would be American carnage.
Trump probably hasn't seen past his "win".
They would merely be ruling the election in four states unconstitutional, and returning the power to choose electors in those four states to their legislatures.
(I think!).
SCOTUS isn't going to do anything with this case as it's preposterous but it was filed before the safe harbour date so it can still be heard (if it had merit) can't it?0 -
-
0
-
God forbid if little Timmy didn't get his ridiculously over-priced Apple headphones....what a stupid example by the Telegraph.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336797354264039427?s=200 -
Likewise. We have been on a multivitamin & mineral supplement since Foxy advised it way back in Jan or Feb. Vit.s A,B, C, D3, E, K , Zinc, Magnesium and enough other oddball metal to make me concerned that it is high tensile steel filings....Gallowgate said:
Unlikely, I supplement it quite heavily.londonpubman said:
Are you deficient Gallowgate? In Vitamin D I mean?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
1 -
Yeah and LadyG is a lesbian who is not called Sean.FrancisUrquhart said:
I thought there was no Brexit discussion on the agenda for the meeting tomorrow?Philip_Thompson said:I wonder if there's going to be a meaningful readout tonight or if it will be a holding message and nothing new until the EU Council meeting tomorrow etc ?
0 -
Plus ca change from the sound of it.0
-
I don't particularly, I just wanted to remind this poster of the outcome of discussion last night.Big_G_NorthWales said:
They have been suspended pending a full investigation by Sky and if Boulton's comments are anything to go by their careers with Sky are overAnabobazina said:
I see you were wrong about Kay Burley and all her colleagues being sacked by 5pm today.gealbhan said:
That’s the spirit.Carnyx said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXbDQBsFFIEgealbhan said:
Nonsense. Boris has been at his Churchillian best all day, the UK are on for a bloody good result this evening.LadyG said:
The bottom line is Rosy is not in the same league as Boris as tough negotiator. The EU may have some good arguments, but that means zilch when comes down to a negotiation, the better negotiator wins regardless of the hand dealt.
The UK wanted it to come down to this. Boris v Rosy. UK wins. This is the guy who negotiated the brexit win with the voters, negotiated to be PM, then destroyed the Labour Party in its heartlands negotiating with the voters.
Disagree? You actually think Rosy is a tougher, better negotiator than Boris is? Just based on your prejudice not fact.
It’s like the Battle of Britain tonight. Blighty v Germany. If Global Britain were to last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was his finest hour.”
(I do so like that film, I must admit.)
Despite your insistence. I predicted a hostage to fortune.
You said, “we’ll see”. And so we did.
I am surprised how you seem to want to defend them
Despite his insistence, he was of course wrong.
That said, I think sacking them is extreme.0 -
Decision needs to be made by Sunday.0
-
Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.0
-
Can kicked for a few more days. Faisal Islam had an interesting point that the PM might accept a bilateral ratchet clause as his concession and sell it as “the Europeans will need to follow OUR high standards!”.0
-
So do we get his Neville Chamberlain moment on Sunday then?Scott_xP said:0 -
The negotiating teams will get back on it tomorrow. The EU will ramp up no deal prep. In Luke warm message the UK will tell business they should be far down road to no deal planning now, as previously advised.Philip_Thompson said:I wonder if there's going to be a meaningful readout tonight or if it will be a holding message and nothing new until the EU Council meeting tomorrow etc ?
0 -
OK, it seems that some experts disagree with the IOM recommendations.TimT said:
I think that is probably bollocks. The Institute of Medicine and the National Academies of Science in the US did a study on Vitamin D about 10 years ago that basically said that as little as 5 minutes outside in daylight is enough for a normal person to create sufficient VitD regardless of skin colour. It resulted in a change in recommendations to healthcare professionals, IIRC.Gallowgate said:
I don't have a source, but it's what various doctors have told me over the years. It doesn't matter what colour skin people have if they spend most of the day indoors.turbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
See Skin type I and Boston in the winter:
https://www.jwatch.org/jd201006040000002/2010/06/04/how-much-sunlight-equivalent-vitamin-d0 -
You gain a competitive advantage through improving your own productivity.gealbhan said:
“ratchet” clause to ensure that as one side upgrades its standards, the other is not able to enjoy a competitive advantage.Philip_Thompson said:
Lorry driver regulations were only introduced a few years ago. My company at the time were hit by it and my colleagues on the road were irritated by it and not keen on the changes at the time.Beibheirli_C said:
Time to return to pre EEC/EU working practices. Another Brexit "benefit" ....Scott_xP said:
I don't particularly care either way but it's not exactly sending chimney sweeps up.
What is the point of brexit if you accept ratchet clause? On feet in commons claiming take back control would be hollow? Canada + ratchet clause would be worst of all worlds BINO.
Boris is right, he can’t sign that clause, it’s not a brexit the nation voted for, not one he could convince voters back home delivers take back control. EU have to surrender or we give them the full Australian.1 -
I did wonder when the Treasury would try to get VAT from gig economy apps. The technicality being used to avoid paying VAT didn't seem like something that would last (nor stand up to court cases although I'm not sure what the status of the Uber VAT case is).FrancisUrquhart said:God forbid if little Timmy didn't get his ridiculously over-priced Apple headphones....what a stupid example by the Telegraph.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336797354264039427?s=200 -
Just as a matter of interest did you want Cummings sackedAnabobazina said:
I don't particularly, I just wanted to remind this poster of the outcome of discussion last night.Big_G_NorthWales said:
They have been suspended pending a full investigation by Sky and if Boulton's comments are anything to go by their careers with Sky are overAnabobazina said:
I see you were wrong about Kay Burley and all her colleagues being sacked by 5pm today.gealbhan said:
That’s the spirit.Carnyx said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXbDQBsFFIEgealbhan said:
Nonsense. Boris has been at his Churchillian best all day, the UK are on for a bloody good result this evening.LadyG said:
The bottom line is Rosy is not in the same league as Boris as tough negotiator. The EU may have some good arguments, but that means zilch when comes down to a negotiation, the better negotiator wins regardless of the hand dealt.
The UK wanted it to come down to this. Boris v Rosy. UK wins. This is the guy who negotiated the brexit win with the voters, negotiated to be PM, then destroyed the Labour Party in its heartlands negotiating with the voters.
Disagree? You actually think Rosy is a tougher, better negotiator than Boris is? Just based on your prejudice not fact.
It’s like the Battle of Britain tonight. Blighty v Germany. If Global Britain were to last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was his finest hour.”
(I do so like that film, I must admit.)
Despite your insistence. I predicted a hostage to fortune.
You said, “we’ll see”. And so we did.
I am surprised how you seem to want to defend them
Despite his insistence, he was of course wrong.
That said, I think sacking them is extreme.0 -
Minerals in nuts, seeds, pulses, vegetables and legumes are great, but harder for the body to absorb than those found in meats, eggs, and dairy.Foxy said:
Sunshine doesn't seem to stop lots of people dying in Florida, Texas, Iran, India etc etcturbotubbs said:
Source? A lot of folk in the more northern climes and of more melanated skin yes, but less so down south and paler.Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.
There is lots of Zinc in nuts and seeds. Vegetarians are not zinc deficient. Indeed there is reasonable evidence that being vegetarian is significantly life extending, and healthy years too.
I don't know what information you're using for the bald statement that vegetarians aren't zinc deficient, or what research you allude to on vegetarianism, but I strongly suspect there are other factors. Vegetarianism is usually a middle class habit, so would correlate strongly with people living a bit longer - that doesn't equal causation.
We have ample evidence from the past to look at, of cultures who have been vegetarian over generations, and none of them have a reputation for longevity.1 -
An extraordinarily impressive poster if that's what it isCarlottaVance said:Grim
1 -
Nor me.Razedabode said:Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.
0 -
-
Philip_Thompson said:
I thought safe harbour date was the day the court cases need to be filed by, not the day they need to be resolved by?MikeSmithson said:
Agreed. It is now too late though that is not going to stop the Trumpsters trying anything just to keep this current.TimT said:
Surely, under the law, it is now too late for even that, as safe harbor has passed.contrarian said:
That's a good point, but in upholding the Texas claim, the Supreme Court would not be overturning the result of the election.Mexicanpete said:
It would be more worrying if SCOTUS overturns the election. It was as safe an election as the USA have ever had,contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
if in the unlikely event SCOTUS were to hand it to Trump, what happens next? Civil war, key Democrats executed for treason, martial law, summary execution of protesters by the military and the police, what else? It would be American carnage.
Trump probably hasn't seen past his "win".
They would merely be ruling the election in four states unconstitutional, and returning the power to choose electors in those four states to their legislatures.
(I think!).
SCOTUS isn't going to do anything with this case as it's preposterous but it was filed before the safe harbour date so it can still be heard (if it had merit) can't it?
No, a law dating back to the year after Rutherford Hayes won the Presidency without a popular vote victory because state houses in the South overturned the electorates' decisions created the Safe Harbor date as being the date after which - if the results have been duly certified by state officials - the other remedies cease to be permitted and the EC delegates must be allocated according to the vote. Or that is my understanding based on various radio show explanations.0 -
Correct.Razedabode said:Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.
0 -
Both sides still fundamentally misunderstand each other. Sad to see - not sure how this position is of benefit to anyone.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Nor me.Razedabode said:Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.
1 -
They won’t be ignored. They will summarily be dismissed.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....1 -
So No Deal it is.
Ho hum.0 -
What is he eating? Profiteroles?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=200 -
Maybe he is offer to one of those gentlemen-only parties the chap from Fidesz attendedRoger said:0 -
The Telegraph being silly as usual. The reason they’re doing this is to unclog Folkestone so that, whatever happens with the negotiations, the increase in paperwork at the port isn’t compounded by a bunch of backlogged shipping containers. I’m not a fan of removing this sort of safety measure but frankly, given the government have elected not to do its homework and establish a working customs system, they need to do something to clear capacity before Jan.FrancisUrquhart said:God forbid if little Timmy didn't get his ridiculously over-priced Apple headphones....what a stupid example by the Telegraph.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1336797354264039427?s=200 -
Until Sunday, then it will be next Sunday.Philip_Thompson said:Decision needs to be made by Sunday.
2 -
I've been pretty critical of Biden but it looks like he is about to make a real good call and select Doug Jones for Attorney General.0
-
It is not but I cannot see Boris capitulatingRazedabode said:
Both sides still fundamentally misunderstand each other. Sad to see - not sure how this position is of benefit to anyone.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Nor me.Razedabode said:Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.
1 -
More importantly were they made in the micra-worthy....Anabobazina said:
What is he eating? Profiteroles?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=200 -
As an adopted Geordie you'll be allowed to put on a t-shirt and long trousers outside in a couple of weeks.Gallowgate said:
Unlikely, I supplement it quite heavily.londonpubman said:
Are you deficient Gallowgate? In Vitamin D I mean?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.0 -
The bottom line is still that only one 'side' (by whatever botched, unexamined, chaos infused process) has chosen to be in this position.Razedabode said:
Both sides still fundamentally misunderstand each other. Sad to see - not sure how this position is of benefit to anyone.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Nor me.Razedabode said:Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.
1 -
There is nothing ‘in there’.MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.
This is simply states which vortex Republican trying to overturn the votes in states which voted Democratic. With zero grounds for action.5 -
Or perhaps the briefing are all mis direction - i.e. some areas of movement were discussed at dinner, pretend it went badly, hold some more talks and hey presto..deal Sunday.
God knows anymore0 -
Which is likely the entire motivation for his display of slavish devotion.Alistair said:https://twitter.com/timothypmurphy/status/1336775766995038215?s=19
He's also under investigation for federal crimes. Crimes that Trump could pardon him for.0 -
We had a friend from Northern Italy come to visit us on 1st December last year. She was really not well and shouldn't have travelled, but did.Benpointer said:Anyone still thinking this was a plot by China?...
Study suggests Covid-19 circulating in Italy in late November 2019
“Long-term, unrecognised spread of SARS-CoV-2 in northern Italy would help explain, at least in part, the devastating impact and rapid course of the first wave of COVID-19 in Lombardy.”
On December 11th, I went down with the nastiest bug I have had in decades. Confined to bed for a couple of days with every bone aching, a hacking cough lasting for weeks... I had jokingly said "must have been Covid..." Which it couldn't have been, of course.
Now it is a somewhat more stroky beard "Hmmmm......" of uncertainty.0 -
Yes, that seems to be the view from what I've heard is that it will probably be dismissed because the argument is (and this is from a Republican) "crazy". However, there was a caveat that it wasn't 100% guaranteed.rcs1000 said:
I think they'll just give it a one line dismissal: their argument will be that States are free to choose their own methods for appointing electors, and that Texas has no standing to bring a case. (I.e. a Wisconsinite can say that the method of appointing electors breaches their rights, but an individual politician from Texas cannot.)MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.0 -
I get that but I've heard it stated from a few people that the law is interpreted as demanding filing by that date - not resolution by that date. So a court case filed before safe harbour but heard after it is treated as a remedy from before that date.TimT said:Philip_Thompson said:
I thought safe harbour date was the day the court cases need to be filed by, not the day they need to be resolved by?MikeSmithson said:
Agreed. It is now too late though that is not going to stop the Trumpsters trying anything just to keep this current.TimT said:
Surely, under the law, it is now too late for even that, as safe harbor has passed.contrarian said:
That's a good point, but in upholding the Texas claim, the Supreme Court would not be overturning the result of the election.Mexicanpete said:
It would be more worrying if SCOTUS overturns the election. It was as safe an election as the USA have ever had,contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
if in the unlikely event SCOTUS were to hand it to Trump, what happens next? Civil war, key Democrats executed for treason, martial law, summary execution of protesters by the military and the police, what else? It would be American carnage.
Trump probably hasn't seen past his "win".
They would merely be ruling the election in four states unconstitutional, and returning the power to choose electors in those four states to their legislatures.
(I think!).
SCOTUS isn't going to do anything with this case as it's preposterous but it was filed before the safe harbour date so it can still be heard (if it had merit) can't it?
No, a law dating back to the year after Rutherford Hayes won the Presidency without a popular vote victory because state houses in the South overturned the electorates' decisions created the Safe Harbor date as being the date after which - if the results have been duly certified by state officials - the other remedies cease to be permitted and the EC delegates must be allocated according to the vote. Or that is my understanding based on various radio show explanations.0 -
Sounds like failure tonight. Hopefully not total failure.0
-
I’m inclined to believe some flex was shown at least otherwise they’d have just called no deal.Razedabode said:Or perhaps the briefing are all mis direction - i.e. some areas of movement were discussed at dinner, pretend it went badly, hold some more talks and hey presto..deal Sunday.
God knows anymore0 -
This is the weird thing.OnboardG1 said:Can kicked for a few more days. Faisal Islam had an interesting point that the PM might accept a bilateral ratchet clause as his concession and sell it as “the Europeans will need to follow OUR high standards!”.
UK standards are higher than with most countries we trade with.
A few years of ratcheting standards, one way or another, will just result in a few tariffs, one way or another.
But it would get the next few dangerous months out of the way and give the UK a chance to make some proper plans and continue to sort out trade deals with the rest of the world.0 -
Thank you @Anabobazina you are truly a kind soulAnabobazina said:
Third stage of grief.MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.
Our thoughts and prayers etc.1 -
Though the Nissan plant is probably going to close...FrancisUrquhart said:
More importantly were they made in the micra-worthy....Anabobazina said:
What is he eating? Profiteroles?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=200 -
Er, no. She and her colleagues weren't sacked by 5pm. You predicted they would be.gealbhan said:
You sure. Suspended via enquiry that sacks her is win for me surely?Anabobazina said:
I see you were wrong about Kay Burley and all her colleagues being sacked by 5pm today.gealbhan said:
That’s the spirit.Carnyx said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXbDQBsFFIEgealbhan said:
Nonsense. Boris has been at his Churchillian best all day, the UK are on for a bloody good result this evening.LadyG said:
The bottom line is Rosy is not in the same league as Boris as tough negotiator. The EU may have some good arguments, but that means zilch when comes down to a negotiation, the better negotiator wins regardless of the hand dealt.
The UK wanted it to come down to this. Boris v Rosy. UK wins. This is the guy who negotiated the brexit win with the voters, negotiated to be PM, then destroyed the Labour Party in its heartlands negotiating with the voters.
Disagree? You actually think Rosy is a tougher, better negotiator than Boris is? Just based on your prejudice not fact.
It’s like the Battle of Britain tonight. Blighty v Germany. If Global Britain were to last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was his finest hour.”
(I do so like that film, I must admit.)
Despite your insistence. I predicted a hostage to fortune.
You said, “we’ll see”. And so we did.
You were wrong.0 -
Rottenborough was replying to a hypothetical scenario that I held up as a question to Contrarian. I don't think either Rottenborough nor myself were suggesting SCOTUS was likely to overturn the election.Anabobazina said:
Once again (and I bore even myself).rottenborough said:
If SCOTUS overturns it then America is over as a federation of states. How many pieces it will split into and how bad the violence will be in the process is anyone's guess.Mexicanpete said:
It would be more worrying if SCOTUS overturns the election. It was as safe an election as the USA have ever had,contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
if in the unlikely event SCOTUS were to hand it to Trump, what happens next? Civil war, key Democrats executed for treason, martial law, summary execution of protesters by the military and the police, what else? It would be American carnage.
Trump probably hasn't seen past his "win".
AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.
This forum is beyond ridicule at times.1 -
Yes..surely if no change no point talking for 4 more days?!OnboardG1 said:
I’m inclined to believe some flex was shown at least otherwise they’d have just called no deal.Razedabode said:Or perhaps the briefing are all mis direction - i.e. some areas of movement were discussed at dinner, pretend it went badly, hold some more talks and hey presto..deal Sunday.
God knows anymore0 -
He'll have to fly from Munich to do a Chaimberlain.FrancisUrquhart said:
So do we get his Neville Chamberlain moment on Sunday then?Scott_xP said:0 -
Spin it all you like. 😂. Suspended, and if they don’t come back, I was remarkably spot on with how SKY would protect the integrity of its newsroom.Anabobazina said:
I don't particularly, I just wanted to remind this poster of the outcome of discussion last night.Big_G_NorthWales said:
They have been suspended pending a full investigation by Sky and if Boulton's comments are anything to go by their careers with Sky are overAnabobazina said:
I see you were wrong about Kay Burley and all her colleagues being sacked by 5pm today.gealbhan said:
That’s the spirit.Carnyx said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXbDQBsFFIEgealbhan said:
Nonsense. Boris has been at his Churchillian best all day, the UK are on for a bloody good result this evening.LadyG said:
The bottom line is Rosy is not in the same league as Boris as tough negotiator. The EU may have some good arguments, but that means zilch when comes down to a negotiation, the better negotiator wins regardless of the hand dealt.
The UK wanted it to come down to this. Boris v Rosy. UK wins. This is the guy who negotiated the brexit win with the voters, negotiated to be PM, then destroyed the Labour Party in its heartlands negotiating with the voters.
Disagree? You actually think Rosy is a tougher, better negotiator than Boris is? Just based on your prejudice not fact.
It’s like the Battle of Britain tonight. Blighty v Germany. If Global Britain were to last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was his finest hour.”
(I do so like that film, I must admit.)
Despite your insistence. I predicted a hostage to fortune.
You said, “we’ll see”. And so we did.
I am surprised how you seem to want to defend them
Despite his insistence, he was of course wrong.
That said, I think sacking them is extreme.
So who will replace the two ladies, a raid on rival channel to offer promotion, or promote from within. Rottweiler in residence is a niche position for vacancy.
Emma Barnett
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/30/corbyn-unable-to-give-cost-of-childare-pledge-in-interview0 -
Yes, I don't know if it is my micronutrient cocktail that kept the bug out while isolating with Mrs Foxy. I am not inclined to change a winning formula.Beibheirli_C said:
Likewise. We have been on a multivitamin & mineral supplement since Foxy advised it way back in Jan or Feb. Vit.s A,B, C, D3, E, K , Zinc, Magnesium and enough other oddball metal to make me concerned that it is high tensile steel filings....Gallowgate said:
Unlikely, I supplement it quite heavily.londonpubman said:
Are you deficient Gallowgate? In Vitamin D I mean?Gallowgate said:
Pretty much everyone in the UK is vitamin D deficient.Luckyguy1983 said:
True, but that perception can be used to the advantage of the messaging, as it enables you to give more power to the messaging if you have it coming from the NHS, and perhaps even backed up by NHS data. Imagine how powerful it would be if the PM advised us (for example) that most severe cases of covid observed in hospital had commonalities across blood tests of depressed (for example) zinc, magnesium, and vitamin D. It would lead to a huge national conversation about nutrition that would be hugely beneficial.MrEd said:
I'd argue is that another major issue is we equate the whole issue of health with the NHS. If the NHS doesn't tell us to do it, we seem to think it's not that important. There is no coordination across departments or areas to improve people's fitness.Luckyguy1983 said:
It would have been great if the opportunity had been taken to use Covid as a spur to improving the general health and wellbeing of the nation. Sadly we don't have 'health' authorities, we have 'sickness' authorities - we patch people up when they get sick. Keeping them 'healthy' is restricted to absurdly simplistic messages like '5 a day' and 'lose weight'.another_richard said:
On a related note it would have done wonders for the health of the UK if people had improved their diet and fitness irrespective of the greatly reduced risk from covid.Fysics_Teacher said:
I'm sure it would be a lazy stereotype to suggest that getting Russians to stop drinking for two months would save a lot of lives even if the vaccine were a placebo.rottenborough said:
If Putin thinks a vaccine that requires Russians to lay off booze for two months is gonna work, then he doesn't know his own country.OnboardG1 said:
I read somewhere that the head of Gamelya said it was only six days. And now I can't find it and am mildly annoyed.Foxy said:Could be worse, could be having the Sputnik vaccine...
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1336670466543669249?s=09
OT - I am watching a pretty good Michael Caine film called 'The Fourth Protocol'. Very good actor - I hope he's enjoying his retirement.1 -
We don't like the result is not justiciable.Nigelb said:
There is nothing ‘in there’.MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.
This is simply states which vortex Republican trying to overturn the votes in states which voted Democratic. With zero grounds for action.0 -
LOL.MrEd said:
Yes, that seems to be the view from what I've heard is that it will probably be dismissed because the argument is (and this is from a Republican) "crazy". However, there was a caveat that it wasn't 100% guaranteed.rcs1000 said:
I think they'll just give it a one line dismissal: their argument will be that States are free to choose their own methods for appointing electors, and that Texas has no standing to bring a case. (I.e. a Wisconsinite can say that the method of appointing electors breaches their rights, but an individual politician from Texas cannot.)MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.0 -
Re the general abuse aimed at Liam Fox / unflattering comparisons to Liz Truss on PB in recent days.
It was the lack of concern the ERG types showed to Fox's failures which made me thing they were full of crap.
They really should have been demanding a more active trade secretary if they wanted a hard break from the EU.0 -
Well never know for sure. It’s easy to forget that there are other nasty bugs out there. I had a stinky cough over Christmas, then a brief cold in feb. The wife dodged the former, had the later quite hard. We wondered about Covid, but testing through work (phe as part of trials) showed no antibodies. Sometimes someone was really ill in December 2019 because of a horrible virus... that was not Covid.MarqueeMark said:
We had a friend from Northern Italy come to visit us on 1st December last year. She was really not well and shouldn't have travelled, but did.Benpointer said:Anyone still thinking this was a plot by China?...
Study suggests Covid-19 circulating in Italy in late November 2019
“Long-term, unrecognised spread of SARS-CoV-2 in northern Italy would help explain, at least in part, the devastating impact and rapid course of the first wave of COVID-19 in Lombardy.”
On December 11th, I went down with the nastiest bug I have had in decades. Confined to bed for a couple of days with every bone aching, a hacking cough lasting for weeks... I had jokingly said "must have been Covid..." Which it couldn't have been, of course.
Now it is a somewhat more stroky beard "Hmmmm......" of uncertainty.
0 -
Yes, I’m starting to think that’s the landing zone. The problem is that, although I legitimately think Johnson ISN’T that type of Tory, there are enough ERG loons who would like us to deregulate to US levels who would cry foul. But... again Johnson selling an agreement as “Where Blighty goes Europe follows” would probably be as good a headline as you’re going to get.another_richard said:
This is the weird thing.OnboardG1 said:Can kicked for a few more days. Faisal Islam had an interesting point that the PM might accept a bilateral ratchet clause as his concession and sell it as “the Europeans will need to follow OUR high standards!”.
UK standards are higher than with most countries we trade with.
A few years of ratcheting standards, one way or another, will just result in a few tariffs, one way or another.
But it would get the next few dangerous months out of the way and give the UK a chance to make some proper plans and continue to sort out trade deals with the rest of the world.1 -
It's important to remember that Ursula von der Leyen has no authority to make material changes to the EU's agreed position. So there was zero possibility of this cosy dinner producing any concessions from EU side. The most it could have produced is an undertaking from her to consult with the EU premiers to see whether any UK proposal for a possible way out of the impasse might be acceptable. It's very hard to know if the UK did make any such proposal; if Boris simply repeated the Brexiteer nonsense about sovereignty without proposing anything new, then we're heading for no-deal crash-out. In that scenario, bad for the EU and disastrous for the UK, the EU will simply wait for the UK to come to its senses.0
-
Is Heston Aerodrome still operational?eristdoof said:
He'll have to fly from Munich to do a Chaimberlain.FrancisUrquhart said:
So do we get his Neville Chamberlain moment on Sunday then?Scott_xP said:0 -
That's odd....they both changed before dinner....unless its fake news?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=20
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1336789739605815309?s=20
Boris in Japan:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/boris-johnson-arrives-in-japan-to-bang-the-drum-for-london-on-threeday-tour-a3088451.html
0 -
I had something last November that put me in hospital with pneumonia, but as it was cleared up with a lot of antibiotics it certainly wasn't C-19.turbotubbs said:
Well never know for sure. It’s easy to forget that there are other nasty bugs out there. I had a stinky cough over Christmas, then a brief cold in feb. The wife dodged the former, had the later quite hard. We wondered about Covid, but testing through work (phe as part of trials) showed no antibodies. Sometimes someone was really ill in December 2019 because of a horrible virus... that was not Covid.MarqueeMark said:
We had a friend from Northern Italy come to visit us on 1st December last year. She was really not well and shouldn't have travelled, but did.Benpointer said:Anyone still thinking this was a plot by China?...
Study suggests Covid-19 circulating in Italy in late November 2019
“Long-term, unrecognised spread of SARS-CoV-2 in northern Italy would help explain, at least in part, the devastating impact and rapid course of the first wave of COVID-19 in Lombardy.”
On December 11th, I went down with the nastiest bug I have had in decades. Confined to bed for a couple of days with every bone aching, a hacking cough lasting for weeks... I had jokingly said "must have been Covid..." Which it couldn't have been, of course.
Now it is a somewhat more stroky beard "Hmmmm......" of uncertainty.0 -
Indeed that is a good point.another_richard said:Re the general abuse aimed at Liam Fox / unflattering comparisons to Liz Truss on PB in recent days.
It was the lack of concern the ERG types showed to Fox's failures which made me thing they were full of crap.
They really should have been demanding a more active trade secretary if they wanted a hard break from the EU.
The good work of Truss and Gove mean that it is a much simpler jump now to no deal if that is how it ends.
No regrets that Fox is gone. Useless.1 -
I think they won't even touch the merit of the complaint, they'll simply say that the plaintiffs don't have standing.MrEd said:
Yes, that seems to be the view from what I've heard is that it will probably be dismissed because the argument is (and this is from a Republican) "crazy". However, there was a caveat that it wasn't 100% guaranteed.rcs1000 said:
I think they'll just give it a one line dismissal: their argument will be that States are free to choose their own methods for appointing electors, and that Texas has no standing to bring a case. (I.e. a Wisconsinite can say that the method of appointing electors breaches their rights, but an individual politician from Texas cannot.)MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.
(The Roberts Court has used this to duck many, many cases. And this is important because while the Chief Justice is just one vote when it comes to cases, he has a lot of latitude in deciding which cases actually get heard.)0 -
We have some months pain readjusting built in. But what happens after x amount of months? No one knows. But I suspect 4, 5, 6 months in without readjustment period settling down and public opinion in UK will crack.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Nor me.Razedabode said:Feels like no deal to me. EU probably thinks some months of pain means UK will budge eventually. I can't see that happening.
0 -
I think it would be naive to expect it all to resolve over dinner. I don’t know where we will end up, but they are still talking, and I would note that the talks go on after the eu summit- perhaps some hard talking amongst the eu needs to be done too. French fishing fleets don’t do well in no free trade deal scenarios.Jonathan said:Sounds like failure tonight. Hopefully not total failure.
0 -
Yes, of course, but because he is a toxic culture warrior –– not because of his trip to Barnard Castle, which I thought was trivial guff, as I said repeatedly on here at the time.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Just as a matter of interest did you want Cummings sackedAnabobazina said:
I don't particularly, I just wanted to remind this poster of the outcome of discussion last night.Big_G_NorthWales said:
They have been suspended pending a full investigation by Sky and if Boulton's comments are anything to go by their careers with Sky are overAnabobazina said:
I see you were wrong about Kay Burley and all her colleagues being sacked by 5pm today.gealbhan said:
That’s the spirit.Carnyx said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXbDQBsFFIEgealbhan said:
Nonsense. Boris has been at his Churchillian best all day, the UK are on for a bloody good result this evening.LadyG said:
The bottom line is Rosy is not in the same league as Boris as tough negotiator. The EU may have some good arguments, but that means zilch when comes down to a negotiation, the better negotiator wins regardless of the hand dealt.
The UK wanted it to come down to this. Boris v Rosy. UK wins. This is the guy who negotiated the brexit win with the voters, negotiated to be PM, then destroyed the Labour Party in its heartlands negotiating with the voters.
Disagree? You actually think Rosy is a tougher, better negotiator than Boris is? Just based on your prejudice not fact.
It’s like the Battle of Britain tonight. Blighty v Germany. If Global Britain were to last for a thousand years, men will still say, "This was his finest hour.”
(I do so like that film, I must admit.)
Despite your insistence. I predicted a hostage to fortune.
You said, “we’ll see”. And so we did.
I am surprised how you seem to want to defend them
Despite his insistence, he was of course wrong.
That said, I think sacking them is extreme.
I'd like to see the moralising authoritarians on PB retained too, although a short period of reflective silence from them would be welcome.0 -
LOL indeed.Anabobazina said:
LOL.MrEd said:
Yes, that seems to be the view from what I've heard is that it will probably be dismissed because the argument is (and this is from a Republican) "crazy". However, there was a caveat that it wasn't 100% guaranteed.rcs1000 said:
I think they'll just give it a one line dismissal: their argument will be that States are free to choose their own methods for appointing electors, and that Texas has no standing to bring a case. (I.e. a Wisconsinite can say that the method of appointing electors breaches their rights, but an individual politician from Texas cannot.)MrEd said:
17 states have now joined in the case. Personally, and yes from a "Trumpster", I don't think they will win but such a block will make it harder for SCOTUS to say no.rcs1000 said:
Here's the problem with the Texas lawsuit.contrarian said:
Good evening.Peter_the_Punter said:Meanwhile, back in the USA...
'Texas’s motion for leave to file a lawsuit, which seeks to have the justices throw out the election results in the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (all of which Trump lost), landed on the high court’s docket on Tuesday. Election law experts dismissed the lawsuit as nothing more than a stunt, albeit a “dangerous” one. But President Trump’s supporters seized on the simple fact that the justices are requiring the states to respond by Thursday as evidence that the court will actually hear—or has actually agreed to hear—the case. It is unlikely that the court will decide to hear the case and the court has not agreed to hear it.'
So, apart from Trump, Contrarian and Betfair, who stills thinks the result might be overturned?
I understand more than a dozen other US states have now joined Texas in seeking redress for the unconstitutional actions by the four states being sued
That's a lot of states for the Supreme Court to ignore, right there.
Indeed, what would be the point of the Supreme Court, or the constitution, if the case were ignored...? the whole thing would be a sham. Maybe it is, anyway.
Interestingly only 7 states formed the original confederacy....
It alleges that easy access to mail in voting is unconstitutional. And therefore seeks to throw out the electoral college votes of four states which Biden won, and which had this form of voting.
But if you're going to throw out those results on the basis on easy mail in voting, you have to also get rid of Florida (super easy), Utah (compulsory), North Carolina (super easy) and a bunch of other states.
Indeed, the group you're left with is New York, Illinois, Texas and a few other North Eastern States who voted Democrat.
And maybe that is one of the points, or at least the silver lining if they don't do the impossible and win the case. They get to present their evidence to SCOTUS, there might be things in there that people question or where it creates doubt.
Almost as much as Kay Burley going...0 -
It's a Photoshop. Not an especially good one (look at the straight line going through Johnson's elbow on the left).CarlottaVance said:
That's odd....they both changed before dinner....unless its fake news?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=20
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1336789739605815309?s=20
Boris in Japan:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/boris-johnson-arrives-in-japan-to-bang-the-drum-for-london-on-threeday-tour-a3088451.html0 -
Quickly spotted.CarlottaVance said:
That's odd....they both changed before dinner....unless its fake news?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=20
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1336789739605815309?s=20
Boris in Japan:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/boris-johnson-arrives-in-japan-to-bang-the-drum-for-london-on-threeday-tour-a3088451.html
Still looks nice what he is eating though.0 -
Is from October...Getty Images...reverse image search if your friend.CarlottaVance said:
That's odd....they both changed before dinner....unless its fake news?Theuniondivvie said:Fair does, this is pure Sir Les.
twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/1336795249801355264?s=20
twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1336789739605815309?s=20
Boris in Japan:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/boris-johnson-arrives-in-japan-to-bang-the-drum-for-london-on-threeday-tour-a3088451.html
0 -
spacex launch 50 seconds0
This discussion has been closed.