Options
DeSantis edges Trump out to become new WH2024 favourite – politicalbetting.com
DeSantis edges Trump out to become new WH2024 favourite – politicalbetting.com
There has been a big move in the betting on who will win the 2024 White House race. The controversial Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, has now become the favourite pushing out Trump.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Election winner:-
Trump 4.6
De Santis 4.7
Biden 7.2
Harris 17
Pence 19
Republican Nominee:-
Trump 2.5
De Santis 2.98
Pence 12
Haley 19.5
Levelling Up Secretary is the driving force behind a whole series of terrible policy mistakes
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/06/27/michael-gove-one-man-economic-catastrophe/ (£££)
M&S Oxford Street, landlords and fracking, apparently.
https://www.gbnews.uk/news/freeview-users-to-lose-nine-channels-this-week-as-part-of-major-signal-switch-off/325605
GB News has just noticed that some channels will disappear this week as frequencies are lost to 5G.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/dazzling-emma-raducanu-dashes-to-victory-in-35-000-of-jewellery-in-centre-court-debut-6jdwq0gr6 (£££)
That is what has been missing from my game. Bling by Tiffany who sponsor Raducanu.
Non-paywalled Mail:-
Emma Raducanu, 19, stuns in a £4,000 necklace, £19,000 bracelet and £7,500 earrings from Tiffany for her Wimbledon opening match
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10957933/Emma-Raducanu-stuns-19-000-bracelet-4-000-necklace-earrings-worth-7-500-Tiffany.html
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cricket-officials-believe-cocaine-fuelling-crowd-problems-g6d3h5xx2 (£££)
Cocaine has also been blamed for problems at football and racing.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-06-26/ukraine-russian-invasion-history-family-recipes-stuffed-chicken-necks
… The recipes have taken on a new meaning since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. I now keep the notebook near me, rereading the words of my grandmother who was born in Vinnytsia, Ukraine, and lived through Stalin’s Holodomor genocide in the 1930s, followed by the Holocaust.
Sometimes I browse for meal ideas, like her recipe for chopped liver or vareniky (Ukrainian dumplings) or pickled cabbage and cucumbers, a staple of Jewish shtetl life in Eastern Europe. Other times I stare at her teacher’s shorthand, seeking comfort in its neatness, or anxiously search for random things — a Yiddish word, for instance, amid the Russian, or the handwritten table of contents with a squiggly 7 — just to make sure they’re still there.
I keep returning to her recipe for “stuffed chicken necks,” a poor man’s delicacy that often has no neck in it whatsoever. It’s a craft project: Skin the chicken, make a pouch out of the skin, then stuff it with a mixture of fried onions, chicken fat, flour (or farina) and, if you’re lucky, giblets.
“Chicken necks” is a festive and scrappy dish, having sustained Ashkenazi Jewish families for generations, even extolled by Yiddish author Sholem Aleichem in his 1902 short story “Geese.” Nothing, not even the bird’s skin or stomach, should go to waste. “Sew them up,” my grandmother writes. Then boil, slice and serve…
... Raducanu using a Wilson racket and earning about £100,000 doing so. But although she appears to use the “copper green” Blade V8, the Brit actually plays with a Wilson Steam 100, a discontinued model which gets spray painted to look like the Blade.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/18687303/emma-raducanu-sponsors-dior-porsche/
You hear similar stories about footballers and their boots.
(+- change from GE)
Sinn Féin 36% (+11)
Fine Gael 19% (-2)
Fianna Fáil 14% (-8)
Greens 4% (-3)
People Before Profit/Solidarity 4% (+1)
Social Democrats 4% (+1)
Aontú 3% (+1)
Labour 3% (-1)
oth 12% (-2)
(Red C/Sunday Business Post; 25 June)
The sponsors don’t’ really care what clubs the pro actually uses, as long as the rest of us think it’s the sponsor’s product.
Doctors have thrown down the gauntlet to the government by calling for a pay rise of up to 30% over the next five years, in a move that increases the chances of strike action.
Delegates at the British Medical Association’s (BMA) annual conference voted to press ministers to agree to the increase to make up for real-terms cuts to their salaries over the last 14 years.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jun/27/uk-doctors-demand-pay-rise-of-up-to-30-over-five-years
It's very difficult to see where the space for compromise is in this situation. The medics have effectively had a huge real terms pay cut since the GFC. They want the whole lot back; the Government wants their wages to continue shrinking for the foreseeable.
The imminent prospect of industrial action all over the NHS is awkward for the Government, but this and other disputes are going to leave Keir Starmer's fence sitting arse so full of splinters that he won't be able to sit down for months unless he chooses a side. If Labour makes wishy-washy noises about negotiations and nothing else then it will be assumed by angry unions and watching members of the general public alike that it is either entirely clueless, or that it basically agrees with the pay austerity stance of the Conservatives.
Doubtless the Opposition wants to avoid doing detail before an election campaign in case it finds its ideas being nicked, but public sector pay disputes are happening right now, not in 2024, and it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask what Labour's approach to these demands is. What criteria do they think are reasonable for calculating pay increments - or are they in the "you get fuck all regardless" camp with the current Government?
Let's leave the misogyny off here.
Personally, would love to never hear of any of Trumps friends and family ever again.
To be quite honest, I doubt if strike action is going to have nearly the impact of people voting with their feet. Schools are suffering from absolutely appalling staff shortages, and the NHS doesn't sound much better. Not surprising given the enormous increases in workload, the appalling mismanagement from Whitehall and the derisory pay increases that show how much we as a nation really admire these professions. Which would you rather be as a doctor - stuck on the wards all day for a if not a pittance certainly not a wage that reflects your ability and the effort you put in, or doing a nice part time job in private practice? Not a hard decision, is it?
Strikes sod things up for a few days. Literally running out of staff has an impact that is ongoing for months or even years.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/06/28/ukraine-news-russia-war-invasion-latest-nato-grain-kremenchuk/
NATO calling up an extra 250,000 troops(!) to a state of readiness, as they meet today following the G7. UK defence minister suggesting that 2% military spending target should move up to 2.5%.
It must be attractive to them because he brings a lot of the things they like about Trump (corporate welfare, social conservatism and frank disregard for environmental issues) without all of the mental Trump baggage.
The only minister more openly dishonest and incompetent than Johnson himself.
There’s a lot wrong with schools staging for children what appear to be very adult-themed and sexually provocative drag shows, without asking parents first.
As we’re seeing now, it’s far harder to displace an army that’s already mounted an invasion than it is to deter the invasion to begin with.
I never thought a great deal of tennis until Mrs C & I were given tickets for the first day at Wimbledon and I was really impressed by the amount of effort that the players had to put into it!
Which is why the west's poor response to previous Russian actions are so notable. We gave Putin the indication that he could do whatever he wanted, and we would just chuck a few sanctions at him, tut, and then get on with the new world he had created.
A worry is that he might still believe that is the case; that we will fold. A big worry is that we will.
That’s going to be a substantial proportion of the land armies of Western Europe and the USA.
The British Army is 80k people, plus 50k reservists. How many will we send, 30k or so? That’s one hell of a movement.
But Russia has almost certainly killed tens of thousands of civilians as they level Ukrainian towns and cities. Who knows what the actual total is ?
Overseas deployment of that percentage of the armed forces is not sustainable for any duration.
I don't get a vote as I am in a different Union.
And the Shapps nonsense intended to make Johnson look impressive in comparison.
Though I'm not convinced about the latter point, given the number of us thinking even Grant Shapps might be a slight improvement...
There’s also a lot of British soldiers already in Poland, training Ukranians on the kit we’ve donated to them.
As you suggested yesterday, get making military equipment. Not orders for next-gen shiny stuff that’s a decade away, but lots more of what’s in production already.
It would be Brigade strength at best so 5-6,000 mounted on a ramshackle assortment of CR2, CVR(T), FV430s and Bulldog/Jackal. It would also severely impeded the effort to commit the scheduled high readiness Mech/Armoured Brigade to NATO as scheduled in 2024 and that endeavour was already hanging on a shoogly peg.
The NATO 300,000 figure is just a change in readniness status for existing formations. It doesn't generate any new units or move any existing ones.
If you want to invest, invest in a business etc, not seeking rent off someone else's house.
If the UK Army can field only 5-6,000, and most European armies are the same, then half the total troops would be American, is that right?
We have 633 squadron, but where are the other 632 squadrons?
The Americans have the 82nd Airborne, but what happened to the other 81? Etc etc...
82nd was, presumably, a consecutive number in the huge expansion of the US Army in tdhe Great War. I expect the number was kept on because it was a specialist unit (airborne); the 81st, however, still exists ...
PS 700 and 800 series began as former Royal Naval Air Service squadrons which were given a 7 prefix when they merged with the RFC to form the Raff, I presume. Of course the brown, gradually changing to crab fat grey, jobs wouldn't dream of changing their own squadron numbers, so they kept No 1 onwards.
633 never existed...
E2A... there used to be some rhyme and reason to it when the 200 squadrons where the ex NAS units and the 600s were RAuxAF, etc but now it's pretty much random and depends on who has the pull inside the MoD.
Dr. Foxy, the legions had bloody weird naming conventions too. Sometimes legions had the same name so they had to add on a bit, or numbers got missed out or never replaced, or names were down to the original place the legion was raised, or where it was sent, or where it won a victory, or if it proved faithful to an emperor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-61961211
The first and second digits in RAF squadrons were series numbers. Lower ones were probably ex-RFC or ex-RNAS squadrons when the RAF was formed at the end of the Great War. 3xx were foreign crews, such as Polish or Czech or from other parts of Nazi-conquered Europe. 633 Squadron was a film not part of the RAF, although the Polish-crewed 303 Squadron was real and did have a film made.
There are lots of gaps now after post-war defence cuts and vandalism by Conservative governments.
Whereabout in the country are you?
And of course it's important to maintain dialogue: and dialogue has been, and will be, happening - though it's difficult when you've got Putin threatening neighbouring countries in speeches, and Lavrov saying some fairly incredible things.
"Otherwise it seems pretty much nailed on that the battlefield nukes will come out as the Russian armies are driven back"
This just sounds like another "We must give the Russians what they want coz, you know, nukes." argument. Another version of the 'we must allow them to save face' rubbish.
A question for you: if our fear of Russian nukes makes us cede territory to Russia, what makes you think Putin won't think "That worked!" and threaten their use over the rest of Ukraine; Estonia, Lithuania etc?
They haven't done so. Russia started the war.
Takes turning the other cheek to a new level.
It was a lot of random mess, really.
If we were to force an attack towards Moscow, then yes, I expect that nuclear weapons would be used - and sadly, validly so. But Ukraine - including its pre-2014 borders - is *not* Russia.
The US did not use nukes on Korea, Vietnam, GWI and GWII etc. The Russians did not use them in Afghanistan. Why? Aside from the literal and political fallout from their use, and their limited strategic benefits, those wars were not on their own territory. They were essentially offensive, not defensive, actions.
It is odd that advocates of Britain's nuclear deterrent seem under the illusion that Russia's nuclear arsenal will be ineffective.
It is in Russia's hands, not the US's. If Russia does not want 'bleeding dry', then it could stop it tomorrow.
Russia is bleeding itself.
1) I am way behind the curve in US politics. Does De Santis - plainly not a liberal lefty etc - share the same anti democratic/Germany 1930s tendencies as Trump?
2) Are we reaching the point where it becomes obvious that the west/NATO will have to choose between (i) long bitter and possibly unwinnable indirect engagement with Russia and (ii) giving Russia a large chuck of what it wants?
3) If the (ii) occurred would Boris want to be the PM holding the baby when that particular music stops?
The west needs to reflect on Afghanistan.
I saw a hornet down the vineyard (Kent) last week. Not such a lovely thing.
Then if 80% vote yes on a 40% turn out you've got nothing to worry about. 80% voting yes on a 65% turnout would however be a big problem..
Ukraine is not Russian. The separatists states are not Russian. Even Crimea is not Russian, whatever they think.
If he's mad enough to use them over Ukraine, he'd use them over those countries, as he sees large parts of Eastern Europe as 'his' land.
I've never said that the threat from nukes is not real, or that it should be dismissed. I think the danger is largely over for their use in Ukraine (Russia has got used to losing), and there's the point that if we let our fear of his nukes stop us doing what is right now, he'll just use that fear again to get more.
Russia started the war, not the other way around. Striking back at an aggressor who started a war is perfectly legitimate.
There is a middle ground between "we should let another nuclear armed state use the threat of its nukes to seize whatever territory it wants" and "nukes are utterly irrelevant, lets invade Moscow unprovoked".