“These people,” said J.D. Vance, author of Hillbilly Elegy, “despite being very religious and having their Christian faith as something important to them, aren’t attending church that much. They don’t have that much of a connection to a traditional religious institution.”
And it's true that nobody has found a good way to replace the social trust engendered by the old institutions. And that makes people's lives worse in itself. It also probably does bad things to the economy; was it OGHJr who was pointing out that we lose more by backing away from opportunities than we save by avoiding risk? There is also the cost of all the layers of compliance that we now have to replace trust-as-default.
But that doesn't excuse what the populist right, Trump, Farage, the whole damn lot of them, have done in the rubble. Partly, they make that lack of trust worse, by amplifying conspiracy rubbish. Then, through their actions, they make untrustworthy behaviour excusable, even aspirational. If everyone else is cheating, so should you- buy my course for only $999.99 right now. In opportunistically exploiting a problem, they make the problem worse.
It's perfectly understandable that people respond to that- especially when so many of the rugs of the old settlement have been pulled from under their feet. But it doesn't mean that it will help them.
But that doesn't excuse what the populist right, Trump, Farage, the whole damn lot of them, have done in the rubble. Partly, they make that lack of trust worse, by amplifying conspiracy rubbish. Then, through their actions, they make untrustworthy behaviour excusable, even aspirational. If everyone else is cheating, so should you- buy my course for only $999.99 right now. In opportunistically exploiting a problem, they make the problem worse.
It's perfectly understandable that people respond to that- especially when so many of the rugs of the old settlement have been pulled from under their feet. But it doesn't mean that it will help them.
Somebody upthread posted that "Labour need to find answers to the questions these people are asking"
There are 2 problems with that statement
Labour don't need an answer to a question that is 100% bullshit
The Tories need to stop telling these people they are right...
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
I don't understand this much and casually repeated argument: The good guys are to blame for the bad guys being bad.
That's because you see "the bad guys" as the bad guys rather than people who have different views to you.
Trump succeeds because people who should know better don't have a view that's different enough.
(Which is a related but slightly different point from the one I made earlier)
We are not taking geopolitics seriously enough right now. We have North Korean troops fighting in Ukraine. The White House tried to play it down before South Korea doubled down on it. Netanyahu claimed Hezbollah had some of the latest Russian kit. Are we going to wake up to what is going on between China, Russia, Iran and North Korea or not?
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Not that I think Trump will go down too badly in Europe. I suspect there are quite a few who would like an excuse to stop supporting Ukraine and a President Trump would be a good way to find one. More interesting would be those who won't want to toe the line. This can be seen by the forthright statements of certain governments towards Russia. The Poles, Czechs Baltics, Scandanavians, Dutch, UK and one might hope the Canadians. A kind of northern powerhouse if you like. The question is what will France do? They're in a separate category of their own (that's how they like it) but if they side with Northern powerhouse (or Arc of Resistance?) that could make a difference.
Boak, BBC tv is doing ads/trailers for R4’s Today programme, lots of chummy chat with Nick and Justin and Emma. Makes me yearn for John Humphrys, words I thought I’d never write.
‘The conversation starts here.’
I can give them a couple of words it might start with.
Newsnight is also increasingly adopting a more informal tone.
This can be good, if it encourages more spontaneous interactions, or bad, if it encourages more banal cobblers.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
Were I to look for ways to increase manufacturing in Britain, I'd look hard at the policies followed by the successful states in the US. (South Carolina is another.)
Yes, this is quite similar to what I was describing earlier. Trump has managed to appeal to a lot of rural and suburban voters who, while they might not always have had a textbook Bible-belt profile, want to believe in something mythic and good.
The Democrats so far lack the emotional or cultural vocabulary, to.deal with this.
The irony is that Trump has never been very religious.
On the question about diverging male/female politics, weren't spme of the polls beginning to show some similar signs to the U.S., here , with men to the right and women to the left? At least I thought so.
On toilets, although I like Leon's descriptions of.Japan, I'm not sure that the very German, Japanese or American concepts of cleanliness as always linked to civilisation.always hold water, so to speak. The French are both more civilised and less civilised than the Anglo-Saxon world, for instance, and tend to be a bit less bothered, on it.
I remember once having lunch at a Parisian cafe, when a man came up, squatted down, and took a dump in the gutter, in front of me.
Was he trying to pass his French citizenship test?
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
I don't understand this much and casually repeated argument: The good guys are to blame for the bad guys being bad.
I don’t think it necessarily means that.
Economic prosperity both in the UK and US became segmented, especially in the last 2-3 decades
I did very well. Pay rises, lots of work etc.
At the same time a lot of people saw actual wage decreases. Many services and goods became cheaper as a result. For me and those like me - awesome.
So carpeting a flat went from £1600 in 1998 to £700 (same flat) in 2019. Yay for me. For the people in the carpet business?
People like me didn’t sit around a table planning to kick carpet fitters where it hurts. But they got hurt.
I think live was relatively easy and good from 2000-2005. Much more so than now.
Japanese toilets should become the world standard. I realised that when I was in Tokyo for a few days in 2014.
I've never experienced one, but clearly I have been missing out (I recall The Simpsons being impressed by them when they visited Japan too).
The UK is in danger of visitors looking at our facilities like it's a Russian outhouse.
Toilet/sanitation standards are an excellent measure of a civilisation’s standing and trajectory
Eg we admire the Romans for their clever toilets and sewage systems (and central heating and baths etc)
The West was once far ahead in all this. The British invented the flushing loo with u-bend. Since then we’ve, er, sat on our laurels and others have overtaken us and look askance on our facilities, and that speaks to a wider decline
A 'How well did they clean up their shit?' index/thesis would make for an interesting read to assess cultures across history.
Never forget even rich people used to have go in glorified buckets, and now look at us - so no one tell us the industrialisation of humanity and associated developments has been a bad thing!
One of the many amazing aspects of the Palace of Versailles is that the glorious architecture was far in advance of the necessary sanitation, which simply didn’t exist
They built a couple of water closets for the Sun King but they had no idea how to install facilities for hundreds of nobles and thousands of servants
So rich aristo Frenchwomen were forced to literally squat and pee in Versailles corridors, hoping no one would come along
They had hot and cold running water for baths, yet considered toilets unimportant. Yet, Windsor Castle had privies in the 14th century.
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
And along came “cosplay Thatcher” whose very first answer she gave at her PMQ’s - no, we won’t introduce a Windfall Tax. Only Labour put up taxes.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis. Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
I don't understand this much and casually repeated argument: The good guys are to blame for the bad guys being bad.
I don’t think it necessarily means that.
Economic prosperity both in the UK and US became segmented, especially in the last 2-3 decades
I did very well. Pay rises, lots of work etc.
At the same time a lot of people saw actual wage decreases. Many services and goods became cheaper as a result. For me and those like me - awesome.
So carpeting a flat went from £1600 in 1998 to £700 (same flat) in 2019. Yay for me. For the people in the carpet business?
People like me didn’t sit around a table planning to kick carpet fitters where it hurts. But they got hurt.
I think live was relatively easy and good from 2000-2005. Much more so than now.
It explains why Blair did so well for so long.
It depends which side of the property divide you were on. Annual house price inflation of 25% wasn’t great for prudent first time buyers.
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
And along came “cosplay Thatcher” whose very first answer she gave at her PMQ’s - no, we won’t introduce a Windfall Tax. Only Labour put up taxes.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis. Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
The worry shouldn't be so much the froth as the ongoing shift in the tectonic plates.
To be of working age and a Conservative voter has been unusual for a while, and now it's downright weird. And (the important bit), that is a phenomenon of the last decade or so.
A combination of Boris, Brexit and Corbyn created a decent amount of froth in 2019, but that's now gone, and the devil has come to collect his fee. Alternatively, Borisism was like the doping that East German athletes were subjected to. Now their career is over, their reputation is shot and their bits don't work properly.
Say what you want about the French but they have just called for the removal of Francesca Albanese, one of the UN Special Rapporteurs, on grounds of antisemitism.
Shame Roger isn't here to tell us that it's all a misunderstanding.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
I don't understand this much and casually repeated argument: The good guys are to blame for the bad guys being bad.
I don’t think it necessarily means that.
Economic prosperity both in the UK and US became segmented, especially in the last 2-3 decades
I did very well. Pay rises, lots of work etc.
At the same time a lot of people saw actual wage decreases. Many services and goods became cheaper as a result. For me and those like me - awesome.
So carpeting a flat went from £1600 in 1998 to £700 (same flat) in 2019. Yay for me. For the people in the carpet business?
People like me didn’t sit around a table planning to kick carpet fitters where it hurts. But they got hurt.
I think live was relatively easy and good from 2000-2005. Much more so than now.
It explains why Blair did so well for so long.
It depends which side of the property divide you were on. Annual house price inflation of 25% wasn’t great for prudent first time buyers.
An overlooked part of Mr Blair's legacy and more responsible for his unpopularity than people tend to think I would argue.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
The Madison Sq Garden event will probably see him goose stepping and burning an effigy of Barack Obama. That might cost him a few independents in the swing states and in an election this close the whole shebang.
Cue the post mortem analysis: Why Trump came up short. Was it his innumerate economic platform? Or was it when he goose stepped on stage up to an effigy of the first and only black president and set fire to it?
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
The Madison Sq Garden event will probably see him goose stepping and burning an effigy of Barack Obama. That might cost him a few independents in the swing states and in an election this close the whole shebang.
Cue the post mortem analysis: Why Trump came up short. Was it his innumerate economic platform? Or was it when he goose stepped on stage up to an effigy of the first and only black president and set fire to it?
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
The Madison Sq Garden event will probably see him goose stepping and burning an effigy of Barack Obama. That might cost him a few independents in the swing states and in an election this close the whole shebang.
Cue the post mortem analysis: Why Trump came up short. Was it his innumerate economic platform? Or was it when he goose stepped on stage up to an effigy of the first and only black president and set fire to it?
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
I don't know what to make of Vance. Is this all a big con to become president? He previously said Trump was cultural heroin and that Trump was America's Hitler. Does he believe in Project 2025? He doesn't seem to have an ideology except that he is virulently anti-women. He could be Taliban.
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
And along came “cosplay Thatcher” whose very first answer she gave at her PMQ’s - no, we won’t introduce a Windfall Tax. Only Labour put up taxes.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis. Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
Truth being spoken by a Moon Rabbit ... Moon Rabbit Moon Rabbit.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
If so I have a planned "syntactic analysis of Project 2025" article for Q12025, with sequels if demanded.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
I don't know what to make of Vance. Is this all a big con to become president? He previously said Trump was cultural heroin and that Trump was America's Hitler. Does he believe in Project 2025? He doesn't seem to have an ideology except that he is virulently anti-women. He could be Taliban.
He is owned by the billionaires. Which well explains his political transformation over the last decade.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
I don't understand this much and casually repeated argument: The good guys are to blame for the bad guys being bad.
I don’t think it necessarily means that.
Economic prosperity both in the UK and US became segmented, especially in the last 2-3 decades
I did very well. Pay rises, lots of work etc.
At the same time a lot of people saw actual wage decreases. Many services and goods became cheaper as a result. For me and those like me - awesome.
So carpeting a flat went from £1600 in 1998 to £700 (same flat) in 2019. Yay for me. For the people in the carpet business?
People like me didn’t sit around a table planning to kick carpet fitters where it hurts. But they got hurt.
I think live was relatively easy and good from 2000-2005. Much more so than now.
It explains why Blair did so well for so long.
It depends which side of the property divide you were on. Annual house price inflation of 25% wasn’t great for prudent first time buyers.
An overlooked part of Mr Blair's legacy and more responsible for his unpopularity than people tend to think I would argue.
I wonder if we can engineer a big fall in house prices without a crash? Because that, for me, really would be "fixing the foundations".
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
And along came “cosplay Thatcher” whose very first answer she gave at her PMQ’s - no, we won’t introduce a Windfall Tax. Only Labour put up taxes.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis. Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
Truth being spoken by a Moon Rabbit ... Moon Rabbit Moon Rabbit.
The Tory party are seeking votes their merely borrowed from Reform in 2019. And that will gift 40+ seats to the Lib Dems making them an irrelevance post the next election
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I certainly don't see how we wont get some form of succession if Trump is handed the presidency by his Supreme Court after claiming he didn't lose.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
If so I have a planned "syntactic analysis of Project 2025" article for Q12025, with sequels if demanded.
Well I think we should have the pleasure of that anyway. And it'd be a more enjoyable read as a hypothetical.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
I don't know what to make of Vance. Is this all a big con to become president? He previously said Trump was cultural heroin and that Trump was America's Hitler. Does he believe in Project 2025? He doesn't seem to have an ideology except that he is virulently anti-women. He could be Taliban.
Agree it is all very odd. Has he really "seen the light" and become the most ardent born again Trump Cultist or is it, as you say, all an act to get the presidency?
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
Trump is being withdrawn from events due to "exhaustion".
Not a good look when you are 78 and asking people to give you the biggest - and toughest - elected position in the world. One the previous winner isn't fit to continue doing for the same reason.
Of course, that "exhaustion" might be a euphamism for an end-of-life brain exhaustion. An exhaustion from which there is no recovering. An exhaustion that - on the evidence in front of us - is rapidly delivering us Lord Gaga.
And if he still wins, gives us the 25th Amendment and President. And Project 2025. Hurrah say...well, only the big money backers of Project 2025.
The final two and a half weeks of the campaign should be given over to this discussion. Why is Trump the only candidate in modern history who has refused to make his medical records available? (Interesting side story on his records from 2016 being the subject of much tittle-tattle that he probably dictated the record himself...)
If there is any serious discussion of his cognitive decline, then there are no votes added for Trump. Only losses. This discussion might go on anyway - Harris has the footsoldiers and phonebankers to make it a narrative. If the mainstream media don't want to discuss it, it is because they are happy to be governed by a clown with a flamethrower.
Who in the end, is just a guy with a flamethrower.
Funny, I do seem to have missed you loudly complaining that the current President is basically a walking celeriac. Perhaps we've just been posting at different times.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I have a lot of time for this analysis but am interested in your view that China's Taiwan grab would cause global economic meltdown. Can you explain why?
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
Wise words. It does not want a world war I agree. It has a long term trade strategy. A Trade war will slow it down. ASs for Tawain.China is its biggest trading partner.
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
And along came “cosplay Thatcher” whose very first answer she gave at her PMQ’s - no, we won’t introduce a Windfall Tax. Only Labour put up taxes.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis. Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
Truth being spoken by a Moon Rabbit ... Moon Rabbit Moon Rabbit.
The Tory party are seeking votes their merely borrowed from Reform in 2019. And that will gift 40+ seats to the Lib Dems making them an irrelevance post the next election
Yes they have a serious structural problem having lost all those seats to the LDs in the South.
One the supplementaties it asked me to define what One Nation Toryism means.
I feel sorry for the YouGov person who has to read HYUFD's response to that question.
I also had to say whether which Tory politicians were One Nation Tories or not.
Does our monarch rule over one nation, or two nations - the rich and the poor?
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
And along came “cosplay Thatcher” whose very first answer she gave at her PMQ’s - no, we won’t introduce a Windfall Tax. Only Labour put up taxes.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis. Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
Truth being spoken by a Moon Rabbit ... Moon Rabbit Moon Rabbit.
The Tory party are seeking votes their merely borrowed from Reform in 2019. And that will gift 40+ seats to the Lib Dems making them an irrelevance post the next election
Yet, at the same time, we’re approaching cross-over in the polling, and Labour seats are going down like nine pins in local elections, just three months after the election.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
What should those in power do about it that they are not doing? What will prepare us for this possibility, due to land in a few weeks, and what preparation should those with the closed eyes be making? And if they were making any plans, should they be made in public?
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I have a lot of time for this analysis but am interested in your view that China's Taiwan grab would cause global economic meltdown. Can you explain why?
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
Two thirds of the most advanced chips are made there. And there would be no easy way to replace that capability, for years.
(The Fens were very different back then... but Littleport hasn't changed much. )
Known elsewhere in rural Britain, had different names
In Dorset and the West Country it was a “smothering party”
I don't quite get it. The opium kills them? Or removing the pillow? Maybe I am being dense here.
Nor do I. I was expecting to read that the pillow was placed over the ‘victim’s’ face. Mind, having had experience of a very close relative dying with MND, I’m generally supportive of ‘assisted dying’.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I have a lot of time for this analysis but am interested in your view that China's Taiwan grab would cause global economic meltdown. Can you explain why?
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
Two thirds of the most advanced chips are made there. And there would be no easy way to replace that capability, for years.
Yes okay that makes sense. And taking control of that would presumably at a stroke massively increase China's hold over new tech. Thanks.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I have a lot of time for this analysis but am interested in your view that China's Taiwan grab would cause global economic meltdown. Can you explain why?
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
Two thirds of the most advanced chips are made there. And there would be no easy way to replace that capability, for years.
Absolutely right. Tawain Semi etc and China need 10 more years to perfect this technology if they are lucky.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I have a lot of time for this analysis but am interested in your view that China's Taiwan grab would cause global economic meltdown. Can you explain why?
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
Two thirds of the most advanced chips are made there. And there would be no easy way to replace that capability, for years.
Yes okay that makes sense. And taking control of that would presumably at a stroke massively increase China's hold over new tech. Thanks.
They will not bother to take it over. They are currently doing a exchange programme with Tawain their biggest trading partner. I cannot see any invasion happening. There is no need. They have access to the tech they need.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
The space thing is impressive. The Trump connection could be about tax concessions or joint ventures with government.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
The space thing is impressive. The Trump connection could be about tax concessions or joint ventures with government.
He knows the Dems don't like him and are likely to try to make gis life difficult.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
I don't know what to make of Vance. Is this all a big con to become president? He previously said Trump was cultural heroin and that Trump was America's Hitler. Does he believe in Project 2025? He doesn't seem to have an ideology except that he is virulently anti-women. He could be Taliban.
Agree it is all very odd. Has he really "seen the light" and become the most aren't born again Trump Cultist or is it, as you say, all an act to get the presidency?
There's a certain kind of very wealthy person - Musk is another - who initially looked down on Trump as a bit of a joke and a confidence trick on the dumb and gullible. But has subsequently come to believe the confidence trick is a work of genius and they want in on it. That's Vance or the Silicon Valley types who noticed that Trump will probably let them do whatever they want.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
I think I've made the Bobby Fischer comparison before. A genius in his silo, unhinged in his politics. However that would imply Musk believes most of what he's saying and I doubt he does. More likely it's about a lust for power and attention. Fischer was mentally ill.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
The space thing is impressive. The Trump connection could be about tax concessions or joint ventures with government.
He knows the Dems don't like him and are likely to try to make gis life difficult.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
The space thing is impressive. The Trump connection could be about tax concessions or joint ventures with government.
Musk doesn't need any shady deals with Trump. I'm pretty sure he just says what he thinks, and he thinks Trump is the best choice, both for Musk and for the country. It seems strikingly not so to me, but who am I to comment on his domestic political wisdom as I'm British. (And that's a lesson he should learn too)
Yes, this is quite similar to what I was describing earlier. Trump has managed to appeal to a lot of rural and suburban voters who, while they might not always have had a textbook Bible-belt profile, want to believe in something mythic and good.
The Democrats so far lack the emotional or cultural vocabulary, to.deal with this.
The irony is that Trump has never been very religious.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
What should those in power do about it that they are not doing? What will prepare us for this possibility, due to land in a few weeks, and what preparation should those with the closed eyes be making? And if they were making any plans, should they be made in public?
If i was the genius in charge i would crash the stock market and economy as soon as Trump got in in order to discredit his populism.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
I have a lot of time for this analysis but am interested in your view that China's Taiwan grab would cause global economic meltdown. Can you explain why?
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
Two thirds of the most advanced chips are made there. And there would be no easy way to replace that capability, for years.
Yes okay that makes sense. And taking control of that would presumably at a stroke massively increase China's hold over new tech. Thanks.
Maxh while you're around - good header article. Like your last one, thought provoking, and I agreed with more than I disagreed.
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
The fact China does not want Russia to use nukes does not make them a neutral party. And there are many other reasons to think Russia wouldn't use nukes than Beijing vetoing it. I very much doubt North Korean troops would be in Ukraine without their say so (and we should point it out to them) and it's very odd that such a 'force for stability' seems to have so many problems with it's neighbours - Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, India etc.
John Gray has one of the best explanations for populism imo.
"What they call populism is the political blowback against the social disruption their policies have produced. They can't understand the connection between what they've done and populism".
They're totally incapable of understanding it because they can't accept there would be any that isn't entirely beneficial.
I should add, that taken to its logical conclusion it means that there's a risk that all the positive gains of liberalism get overturned in the next 30-50 years.
Which means we could go back to societies where sexism, racism and discrimination are normalised again, with limited rights, unless they rein it in and listen to the concerns of the overreach their policies have caused and the blowback.
The alternative - condemning them harder and faster - will only accelerate their eventual demise.
Sexism is already normalised in our society as even a cursory glance at the news would tell you.
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
The fact China does not want Russia to use nukes does not make them a neutral party. And there are many other reasons to think Russia wouldn't use nukes than Beijing vetoing it. I very much doubt North Korean troops would be in Ukraine without their say so (and we should point it out to them) and it's very odd that such a 'force for stability' seems to have so many problems with it's neighbours - Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, India etc.
If you're the President of China what would you think? I think it's obvious that the main thing is that you look to your own country and think 'bloody hell, what a mess'. China leaps and bounds forwards with an astonishing energy. Some false steps along the road for sure, but mere hiccoughs. The Chinese have a long history, and they have a lot of work to do. I doubt they'll ever rush into conflict. They'll certainly not be precipitated into a conflict with the West because the two idiots in Moscow and Pyongyang do something daft.
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
The fact China does not want Russia to use nukes does not make them a neutral party. And there are many other reasons to think Russia wouldn't use nukes than Beijing vetoing it. I very much doubt North Korean troops would be in Ukraine without their say so (and we should point it out to them) and it's very odd that such a 'force for stability' seems to have so many problems with it's neighbours - Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, India etc.
If you're the President of China what would you think? I think it's obvious that the main thing is that you look to your own country and think 'bloody hell, what a mess'. China leaps and bounds forwards with an astonishing energy. Some false steps along the road for sure, but mere hiccoughs. The Chinese have a long history, and they have a lot of work to do. I doubt they'll ever rush into conflict. They'll certainly not be precipitated into a conflict with the West because the two idiots in Moscow and Pyongyang do something daft.
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
The fact China does not want Russia to use nukes does not make them a neutral party. And there are many other reasons to think Russia wouldn't use nukes than Beijing vetoing it. I very much doubt North Korean troops would be in Ukraine without their say so (and we should point it out to them) and it's very odd that such a 'force for stability' seems to have so many problems with it's neighbours - Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, India etc.
If you're the President of China what would you think? I think it's obvious that the main thing is that you look to your own country and think 'bloody hell, what a mess'. China leaps and bounds forwards with an astonishing energy. Some false steps along the road for sure, but mere hiccoughs. The Chinese have a long history, and they have a lot of work to do. I doubt they'll ever rush into conflict. They'll certainly not be precipitated into a conflict with the West because the two idiots in Moscow and Pyongyang do something daft.
The idiot in Pyongyang does little without the go-ahead from Beijing. NK relies far too much on China for everything to upset the Emperor Xi.
Trouble is, I never hear any serious analysis of why Trump might be doing so well in the USA other than Americans are a bit thick and stupid - which obviously isn't true - and is very patronising and an insult to our intelligence.
We know why he shouldn't be doing so well, but he is.
So, why?
a. Major media sources pump out pro-Trump propaganda. It’s not that Americans are thick: Americans simply don’t get told the facts.
b. Racism is popular.
Hmmm. So your considered view is “ignorant and racist”. Got it. That worked so well in 2016 (in both the US and UK).
Americans are just as intelligent as everyone else in the world, but you ignore that there is a pro-Trump media bubble. If that’s all you hear, you form a very different view of the world.
Trump is racist. He is running a racist campaign. Pretending that’s not happening is just bizarre.
Yep. And win or lose he'll get a big vote on Nov 5th for various reasons. To list a few:
He's the GOP candidate. Loads of people always vote GOP. He's a skilful exploiter of ignorance and resentment. He's charismatic and has built a massive energetic loyal cult (MAGA). Most Americans don't feel better off despite what the stats say.
It might be enough. I don't think so but my instincts could be wrong. Soon find out anyway.
Trump is a warning to democracies everywhere of what you get if mainstream politicians ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of the population. Between 2000 and 2015 life was getting worse for a lot of Americans but almost the entire political class ignored it because it suited them to believe that because everything was going quite well for them it must also be going well for everyone else.
I don't understand this much and casually repeated argument: The good guys are to blame for the bad guys being bad.
I don’t think it necessarily means that.
Economic prosperity both in the UK and US became segmented, especially in the last 2-3 decades
I did very well. Pay rises, lots of work etc.
At the same time a lot of people saw actual wage decreases. Many services and goods became cheaper as a result. For me and those like me - awesome.
So carpeting a flat went from £1600 in 1998 to £700 (same flat) in 2019. Yay for me. For the people in the carpet business?
People like me didn’t sit around a table planning to kick carpet fitters where it hurts. But they got hurt.
I think live was relatively easy and good from 2000-2005. Much more so than now.
It explains why Blair did so well for so long.
1997 to 2007 was as good as it gets for most people.
With North Korean troops moving to Ukraine is now the moment to punish China?
I think China is actually a force for stability in the world in spite of all its manoeuvres around Taiwan.
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
The fact China does not want Russia to use nukes does not make them a neutral party. And there are many other reasons to think Russia wouldn't use nukes than Beijing vetoing it. I very much doubt North Korean troops would be in Ukraine without their say so (and we should point it out to them) and it's very odd that such a 'force for stability' seems to have so many problems with it's neighbours - Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, India etc.
If you're the President of China what would you think? I think it's obvious that the main thing is that you look to your own country and think 'bloody hell, what a mess'. China leaps and bounds forwards with an astonishing energy. Some false steps along the road for sure, but mere hiccoughs. The Chinese have a long history, and they have a lot of work to do. I doubt they'll ever rush into conflict. They'll certainly not be precipitated into a conflict with the West because the two idiots in Moscow and Pyongyang do something daft.
The idiot in Pyongyang does little without the go-ahead from Beijing. NK relies far too much on China for everything to upset the Emperor Xi.
Completely correct. They send food and clothes and whatever N.Korea needs in return for the metals they mine and take out of the country to supply their economy.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
What should those in power do about it that they are not doing? What will prepare us for this possibility, due to land in a few weeks, and what preparation should those with the closed eyes be making? And if they were making any plans, should they be made in public?
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
What should those in power do about it that they are not doing? What will prepare us for this possibility, due to land in a few weeks, and what preparation should those with the closed eyes be making? And if they were making any plans, should they be made in public?
Increase defence spending and actually get the UK Armed Forces back into shape after years of cuts.
While PBers around the globe await results of today's British Columbia provinicial general election:
[Victoria, BC] Times Colonist - Election results could come within an hour of polls closing Once polls close, electronic tabulators will produce paper results that will be phoned in to the district electoral office, where officials will enter the results for publication on Elections B.C.’s website
Faster electronic tabulation means results for the provincial election could be available within an hour of polls closing Saturday.
Elections B.C. spokesperson Andrew Watson said the goal is to have 50 per cent of the results within half an hour of polls closing at 8 p.m., and the majority “within the hour.” . . .
Clerks will be using laptops for electronic registration, so when people show up to vote, they can enter the shortest queue to sign in, produce their proof of identification and register if they haven’t done so already. In the past, people had to wait for a designated line. . . .
The goal of making voting easier and faster is to increase voter participation. Voter turnout was just 54 per cent in 2020, down from about 61 per cent in 2017, and significantly lower than the 71 per cent turnout rate in 1996.
Voters will mark an X or fill in the circle beside a candidate’s name on familiar paper ballots, then place the ballot in a privacy sleeve and feed it into an electronic tabulator, which strips the ballot of the sleeve and reads it.
Once polls close, the machines will produce paper results that will be phoned in to the district electoral office, where officials will enter the results for publication on Elections B.C.’s website. . . .
The other benefit of electronic tabulation is that it captures 98 per cent of the votes cast, including mail-in and absentee ballots.
Advance ballots cast over six days this month — a record-breaking over a million, representing 28 per cent of all registered voters in B.C. — will also be tabulated.
With several ridings on Vancouver Island and the rest of the province too close to call by pollsters, it’s possible one or more will come down to a difference of 100 votes or fewer.
In that case, the ballots from those ridings will be recounted by hand as part of the larger final count scheduled for Oct. 26-28 . . .
If as part of that final manual recount, the difference between two or more candidates in a riding comes within 1/500th of the total votes cast, there will be a judicial recount. After that, the official results will be sent to the chief electoral officer, who will forward them to the B.C. legislature.
In this provincial election, there are 93 ridings, including 15 on Vancouver Island.
Both the NDP and BC Conservatives are running a full slate of candidates, while the Greens are running 69, and a record 40 Independents are in the race, including six incumbents.
What should those in power do about it that they are not doing? What will prepare us for this possibility, due to land in a few weeks, and what preparation should those with the closed eyes be making? And if they were making any plans, should they be made in public?
It would take more time than I have available to go into that in depth, but the most visible preparations in Europe would be re-armament. Acknowledge and accept the significant chance that Trump will leave Ukraine to fall and in too few years Putin will turn the Baltics and Poland into warzones.
Many of the necessary initiatives would take years to come to fruition, you can't just order tanks and fast jets for delivery next month. More immediately European countries should be placing large orders for the kind of consumables critical to a sustained war; artillery and tanks shells, missiles, air dropped munitions, spare parts for vehicles.
Little of this can be hidden. The suppliers involved are usually public companies, if they land orders large enough to have to scale their output by multiple factors they are required to announce to the market at least the basic facts.
Beyond expanding production of artillery shells, none of that is happening. Given the amount of hardware shipped to Ukraine it's very possible Putin could finish Ukraine, regroup, and go for the Baltics before the Western powers have even brought their stockpiles up to pre 2022 levels.
The UK's armed forces supposedly have enough resources to sustain a high intensity conflict for around two weeks. I doubt France or Germany are much better off. No significant efforts are being made to rectify this problem.
Only Poland gets it. They have been ramping defence spending like crazy and spraying around orders for ammunition, tanks and aircraft, and they're not being picky - they'll buy whatever is available for near term delivery. The Poles know they're going to need that hardware if Trump pulls US support for Ukraine, ends sanctions and possibly even begins selling arms to Russia.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
The space thing is impressive. The Trump connection could be about tax concessions or joint ventures with government.
He knows the Dems don't like him and are likely to try to make gis life difficult.
For the Nth time: his greatest advances with Starship were under the Biden Administration and the initial contracts that started the whole commercial space thing were done under the Obama Administration. You are right that they don't like him but business is business and he is the only player on the field.
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Trump 2.0 means the end of the world order as it has been since the 40s. NATO cannot survive if its biggest member effectively switches sides. Any nation with even the most flimsy territorial claim and sufficient military capability will know they will get away with using force.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
End of NATO means nuclear proliferation I imagine. Both Poland and Japan would try to get hold of nukes if the US nuclear umbrella disappears.
Thanks for the header but not a great comparison to my mind.
Focusing on Trump - its unclear to me why another Republican (there are plenty, of varying degrees of extremeness to match your taste) couldn't be your preferred candidate. I know I know, I'm a stupid leftie who doesn't get that the rise of Trump is all my fault etc.
But why him? If you hate immigration, can't you vote for Ted Cruz? Can't you see that Trump has no intention of doing anything - he just wants it as an issue?
It's hard for me to escape the idea that people vote for Trump because he's entertainment and he annoys the right people.
Thanks for the header but not a great comparison to my mind.
Focusing on Trump - its unclear to me why another Republican (there are plenty, of varying degrees of extremeness to match your taste) couldn't be your preferred candidate. I know I know, I'm a stupid leftie who doesn't get that the rise of Trump is all my fault etc.
But why him? If you hate immigration, can't you vote for Ted Cruz? Can't you see that Trump has no intention of doing anything - he just wants it as an issue?
It's hard for me to escape the idea that people vote for Trump because he's entertainment and he annoys the right people.
Many people just hate the liberal elites and Trump reflects that hate back at them.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Is this imagined puppet master perhaps of semitic origin we might wonder.
The man is a cretin.
He seems to make little sense when he ventures into politics, and has made some absolute clangers. Lord knows why he supports Trump - totally against his own interests.
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
The space thing is impressive. The Trump connection could be about tax concessions or joint ventures with government.
He knows the Dems don't like him and are likely to try to make gis life difficult.
For the Nth time: his greatest advances with Starship were under the Biden Administration and the initial contracts that started the whole commercial space thing were done under the Obama Administration. You are right that they don't like him but business is business and he is the only player on the field.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
If Trump thinks he is ahead in the polls, and also realises that he is losing his mental grip, it is very much in his interest to limit his public appearances and coast to a win. That is what his advisors will be saying. But he'll find that hard to take as he loves publicity.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Are we about to get a year of Trump's chaos followed by three years of Vance carefully and steadily implementing Project 2025 and his version of Gilead?
If so I have a planned "syntactic analysis of Project 2025" article for Q12025, with sequels if demanded.
Well I think we should have the pleasure of that anyway. And it'd be a more enjoyable read as a hypothetical.
A syntactic analysis is an analysis that ignores the semantic content and instead looks at the syntax and structure. It includes things like word clouds, information packets, flow charts, Shannon entropy, inline citation, source categorisation, whether it was written by one person or more than one, was any portion plagiarised, and creates a list of contents and index if not present. In politics all things are partisan and disputed, but by using syntactics we can analyse a political document objectively and quickly even without subject-matter knowledge and provides a basis for further, more meaningful work.
Musk might be a remarkable manufacturing innovator - but he's also a deeply weird peddler of conspiracy theories.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
Comments
“These people,” said J.D. Vance, author of Hillbilly Elegy, “despite being very religious and having their Christian faith as something important to them, aren’t attending church that much. They don’t have that much of a connection to a traditional religious institution.”
And it's true that nobody has found a good way to replace the social trust engendered by the old institutions. And that makes people's lives worse in itself. It also probably does bad things to the economy; was it OGHJr who was pointing out that we lose more by backing away from opportunities than we save by avoiding risk? There is also the cost of all the layers of compliance that we now have to replace trust-as-default.
But that doesn't excuse what the populist right, Trump, Farage, the whole damn lot of them, have done in the rubble. Partly, they make that lack of trust worse, by amplifying conspiracy rubbish. Then, through their actions, they make untrustworthy behaviour excusable, even aspirational. If everyone else is cheating, so should you- buy my course for only $999.99 right now. In opportunistically exploiting a problem, they make the problem worse.
It's perfectly understandable that people respond to that- especially when so many of the rugs of the old settlement have been pulled from under their feet. But it doesn't mean that it will help them.
It's sort of like a birthday card that plays Delilah.
There are 2 problems with that statement
Labour don't need an answer to a question that is 100% bullshit
The Tories need to stop telling these people they are right...
(Which is a related but slightly different point from the one I made earlier)
What would a Trump presidency mean? F*ck knows. But we should be taking his statements seriously. He's likely to abandon Ukraine and cosy up to Putin. This could destroy Nato and put us at odds with a US government in a way we haven't been for over 100 years. We're facing a major threat from the Axis of autocrats led by China and it's not clear the US President would be on our side.
Not that I think Trump will go down too badly in Europe. I suspect there are quite a few who would like an excuse to stop supporting Ukraine and a President Trump would be a good way to find one. More interesting would be those who won't want to toe the line. This can be seen by the forthright statements of certain governments towards Russia. The Poles, Czechs Baltics, Scandanavians, Dutch, UK and one might hope the Canadians. A kind of northern powerhouse if you like. The question is what will France do? They're in a separate category of their own (that's how they like it) but if they side with Northern powerhouse (or Arc of Resistance?) that could make a difference.
This can be good, if it encourages more spontaneous interactions, or bad, if it encourages more banal cobblers.
Kamala knows all that and will continue to taunt him with "he's clearly exhausted" to keep him visible. It's not to his advantage anymore.
These last two weeks are going to be fascinating, with increasing frequency of WTF moments.
Toryism was always at its best when seeing more than one nation, and taking action to make it whole.
And one of the most perfect examples - probably the very stuff that made you such a vocal Thatcherite, TSE - Lady Thatcher waving away the bleating Oil Companies and Banks in the early eighties recession, to Windfall Tax them so budgets could put financial help into the households of the struggling working classes.
Were I to look for ways to increase manufacturing in Britain, I'd look hard at the policies followed by the successful states in the US. (South Carolina is another.)
Video summarising. 25 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jTPWJh_V74
"A man walked into a lamp post ..."
A case study in politics and ideology overruling science. With children as victims.
Andrew Sullivan" (£)
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/rachel-levine-must-resign
But it could also mean the city in Missouri at the center of that area, or the city in Kansas, also part of the metropolitan area, by the same name.
It explains why Blair did so well for so long.
I can't stand those dirty indoor things.
That suggests she would struggle to explain what One Nation Conservatism is, and how it produced a century and half of electoral dominance.
She was replaced by a Prime Minister whose idea of assistance programme with energy bills, included giving himself tax payers money to help heat his mansions indoor pool through the crisis.
Did he ever in his political career see Two Nations - the rich and the poor?
There’s no reason for for PB Tories to sound so chipper in recent months, laughing at Starmer’s first hundred days. Going into the next election, not only is the electoral arithmetic abysmal for the Conservatives, but the narrative of how badly they lost their way in government will play for a long long time - like the “Winter of Discontent” narrative played at all 80’s and 90’s elections. Yes, easy to skim froth off top Labours majority, but further down, where seats needed for return to government, once lifelong voting Tories lost over “One Nation” and Brexit, likely stay with Lib Dem’s and Labour for the rest of their lives. 😕
To be of working age and a Conservative voter has been unusual for a while, and now it's downright weird. And (the important bit), that is a phenomenon of the last decade or so.
A combination of Boris, Brexit and Corbyn created a decent amount of froth in 2019, but that's now gone, and the devil has come to collect his fee. Alternatively, Borisism was like the doping that East German athletes were subjected to. Now their career is over, their reputation is shot and their bits don't work properly.
Shame Roger isn't here to tell us that it's all a misunderstanding.
https://x.com/MagicNotWitches/status/1847310580530466893
(The Fens were very different back then... but Littleport hasn't changed much.
Cue the post mortem analysis: Why Trump came up short. Was it his innumerate economic platform? Or was it when he goose stepped on stage up to an effigy of the first and only black president and set fire to it?
In Dorset and the West Country it was a “smothering party”
Trump isn't physically capable of goosestepping.
And, yes, almost nobody in power is taking this seriously enough.
We are not prepared for a world where the US is an enemy. Where Ukraine falls and multiple EU members know they are next in line for Putin's meatgrinder. Where China makes a grab for Taiwan and causes a global economic meltdown.
This isn't even accounting for the not insignificant chance the US itself begins to come apart. If you are the US military command do you obey Trump's orders to abandon Ukraine and begin aiding Russia, or do you consider the unthinkable? Does the Governor of a liberal state acquiesce as Vance & co implement Project 2025, or does succession suddenly become the lest terrible course?
Lots of people are closing their eyes and hoping this doesn't happen. I hope they're not in for an unpleasant shock.
Which well explains his political transformation over the last decade.
I certainly don't see how we wont get some form of succession if Trump is handed the presidency by his Supreme Court after claiming he didn't lose.
ELON MUSK: "There isn't any one puppet master behind Biden and that apparatus. Biden is not in charge. Kamala is not in charge. They just replaced the Biden puppet with the Kamala puppet. You can tell if the teleprompter breaks they start looping. There's many puppet masters.
"I'd love to see the crossover of puppet maters and the Epstein client list."
https://x.com/AutismCapital/status/1847035061738377317
The last thing China wants is a third world war or even a trade war. It holds $0.8 trillion US dollars and I believe is vetoing Putin's use any nuclear weapons. It depends on exports. I think its strategy is to gradually increase and extend its power in a stable world. It is a formidable competitor but I don't think we should view it as the enemy as we do with Putin. It won't militarily attack Taiwan but will retain the aspiration of One China. It's a very long term strategy. A strategy that the West is incapable of.
It's not that I doubt you, I'm just intrigued as to why Taiwan is such a lightning rod for so many, when there are so many other land grabs that happen (and history suggests Taiwan is just the losing side in an internal Chinese conflict). It's impact on the global economy might be an answer.
And there would be no easy way to replace that capability, for years.
Mind, having had experience of a very close relative dying with MND, I’m generally supportive of ‘assisted dying’.
But if he wants to take that line, I wonder who he is taking orders from? Some of the people who 'invested' in Twitter. perhaps?
(Conspiracy theories are really easy to create...)
However look at the booster coming back to earth the other day and landing at the gantry - whatever his bad points might be there are substantial and world-beating good points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIYQfyA_1Hc
[Victoria, BC] Times Colonist - Election results could come within an hour of polls closing
Once polls close, electronic tabulators will produce paper results that will be phoned in to the district electoral office, where officials will enter the results for publication on Elections B.C.’s website
Faster electronic tabulation means results for the provincial election could be available within an hour of polls closing Saturday.
Elections B.C. spokesperson Andrew Watson said the goal is to have 50 per cent of the results within half an hour of polls closing at 8 p.m., and the majority “within the hour.” . . .
Clerks will be using laptops for electronic registration, so when people show up to vote, they can enter the shortest queue to sign in, produce their proof of identification and register if they haven’t done so already. In the past, people had to wait for a designated line. . . .
The goal of making voting easier and faster is to increase voter participation. Voter turnout was just 54 per cent in 2020, down from about 61 per cent in 2017, and significantly lower than the 71 per cent turnout rate in 1996.
Voters will mark an X or fill in the circle beside a candidate’s name on familiar paper ballots, then place the ballot in a privacy sleeve and feed it into an electronic tabulator, which strips the ballot of the sleeve and reads it.
Once polls close, the machines will produce paper results that will be phoned in to the district electoral office, where officials will enter the results for publication on Elections B.C.’s website. . . .
The other benefit of electronic tabulation is that it captures 98 per cent of the votes cast, including mail-in and absentee ballots.
Advance ballots cast over six days this month — a record-breaking over a million, representing 28 per cent of all registered voters in B.C. — will also be tabulated.
With several ridings on Vancouver Island and the rest of the province too close to call by pollsters, it’s possible one or more will come down to a difference of 100 votes or fewer.
In that case, the ballots from those ridings will be recounted by hand as part of the larger final count scheduled for Oct. 26-28 . . .
If as part of that final manual recount, the difference between two or more candidates in a riding comes within 1/500th of the total votes cast, there will be a judicial recount. After that, the official results will be sent to the chief electoral officer, who will forward them to the B.C. legislature.
In this provincial election, there are 93 ridings, including 15 on Vancouver Island.
Both the NDP and BC Conservatives are running a full slate of candidates, while the Greens are running 69, and a record 40 Independents are in the race, including six incumbents.
https://www.timescolonist.com/2024-bc-votes/election-results-could-come-within-an-hour-of-polls-closing-9680224
Many of the necessary initiatives would take years to come to fruition, you can't just order tanks and fast jets for delivery next month. More immediately European countries should be placing large orders for the kind of consumables critical to a sustained war; artillery and tanks shells, missiles, air dropped munitions, spare parts for vehicles.
Little of this can be hidden. The suppliers involved are usually public companies, if they land orders large enough to have to scale their output by multiple factors they are required to announce to the market at least the basic facts.
Beyond expanding production of artillery shells, none of that is happening. Given the amount of hardware shipped to Ukraine it's very possible Putin could finish Ukraine, regroup, and go for the Baltics before the Western powers have even brought their stockpiles up to pre 2022 levels.
The UK's armed forces supposedly have enough resources to sustain a high intensity conflict for around two weeks. I doubt France or Germany are much better off. No significant efforts are being made to rectify this problem.
Only Poland gets it. They have been ramping defence spending like crazy and spraying around orders for ammunition, tanks and aircraft, and they're not being picky - they'll buy whatever is available for near term delivery. The Poles know they're going to need that hardware if Trump pulls US support for Ukraine, ends sanctions and possibly even begins selling arms to Russia.
Focusing on Trump - its unclear to me why another Republican (there are plenty, of varying degrees of extremeness to match your taste) couldn't be your preferred candidate. I know I know, I'm a stupid leftie who doesn't get that the rise of Trump is all my fault etc.
But why him? If you hate immigration, can't you vote for Ted Cruz? Can't you see that Trump has no intention of doing anything - he just wants it as an issue?
It's hard for me to escape the idea that people vote for Trump because he's entertainment and he annoys the right people.
Musk as puppet master to Trump and then Vance? Musk would orgasm so hard even his penis might stretch to three inches.
Having the cheapest and best offering in a market place has a certain effect, in the end…