On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
In 2005, Labour got a 66 majority on 35%. Not a mega landslide, no, but good enough for all practical purposes.
The difference this time was that Reform got 14% and the Greens got 8%, in both cases without over-troubling the constituency scorers. Unless those percentages go down, or the parties involved get much better at playing the FPTP game, then the winning post is at a much lower percentage than we are used to.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
FPTP will continue to throw up bizarre results while we continue to move away from 2-party politics. The next result may not be like the 2024 one, but it will still be weird.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
Personally, I think Labour's vote share was so low in large part because it was clear they were going to win a large majority.
But in 1997 and 2001 it was obvious Blair was going to win a large majority but Labour still got over 40% vote share?
One sends one’s thoughts and prayers to the PB Tories who remain scarred by CURRYGATE, and now have to face this.
Your guy is rapidly appearing to be a duffer. He's better than Johnson and Truss, but - as I think you keep on point out - he has a mahoosive majority, yet keeps on making pratfall after pratfall. Unforced errors abound in this government.
As I've said before, we need to give them time to settle in. But the messes they've got themselves into are absolutely hilarious. The question is whether he, and his government, will learn from those messes.
I hope he does, as the country needs some stability for a while.
LOL. What has he done now? Moved another painting?
You really need to keep up with the news, or check your memory. Do you think his government has got off to a faultless start?
I wonder what SKS would have to do before you strongly criticise him.
I am merely asking what is the latest rick on the Curry-Donkey-Swift continuum. I know it’s important. I just struggle to keep up.
Your reply shows exactly why Labour may fail. No acknowledgement that they've made missteps; no understanding. In fact, no fucking clue.
If the Conservatives weren't in such a hideous state (with few signs of recovery...) then Labour would be in real trouble.
The country deserves better. I hope Labour improve.
The nit-picking from the Tory press and its acolytes here is becoming tedious. Just because he didn’t go to a public school and ‘only’ went to Oxford’ for postgraduate studies.
???
Speaking personally, AFAICR I've never criticised him because he did not go to a public school, and ditto Oxford (though being a fan of Cambridge, that took some restraint...)
SKS is getting criticised because he is making stupid mistakes that take shine off his reputation; not tha he had a lot to begin with. And mistakes which appear, at best, silly. In the case of the good Lord Alli, they appear somewhat worse.
What has he done to trigger this latest round of pearl-clutching? Is it something to do with paintings again?
Nah. Starmer's just a prat and its clear for all to see
There is a lot of a crap, publicly owned art. Around the world.
A friend who works in the art history world told me that much of the good stuff had been taken from Versailles to Paris. Hence the hideous daubs of Louis XXXXXXIXVs eleventh favourite, assistant mistress etc on many of the walls.
I was there once and a very chubby South Koean kid wiped his hand on his T-shirt and was about to touch one of the viler paintings with his crisp encrusted hand. I nearly said something, then realised that he would probably improve it.
At a do in Lambeth Palace a few years ago I was marvelling at all the oil paintings of previous ABoCs which just happened to be the same size, neatly arrayed to fit the room. A fellow guest explained that they were just Victorian wallpaper, knocked off to order, to enhance the building in the eyes of the unwary. No-one has a clue what most C16th prelates looked like anyway.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
But that is assuming you won't attract any new voters. The last election was get the Tories out without people being particularly convinced by Starmer, so people were looking for who the hell do I need to vote for to get rid.
However, if Starmer / Reeves can prove to that can do a decent job, I don't think they will struggle to get a decent vote share that will keep a good majority. Tories managed to do that 2010 -> 2015.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
But that is assuming you won't attract any new voters. The last election was get the Tories out without people being particularly convinced by Starmer, so people were looking for who the hell do I need to vote for to get rid.
However, if Starmer / Reeves can prove to that can do a decent job, I don't think they will struggle to get a decent vote share that will keep a good majority. Tories managed to do that 2010 -> 2015.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
But that is assuming you won't attract any new voters. The last election was get the Tories out without people being particularly convinced by Starmer, so people were looking for who the hell do I need to vote for to get rid.
However, if Starmer / Reeves can prove to that can do a decent job, I don't think they will struggle to get a decent vote share that will keep a good majority. Tories managed to do that 2010 -> 2015.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
Personally, I think Labour's vote share was so low in large part because it was clear they were going to win a large majority.
But in 1997 and 2001 it was obvious Blair was going to win a large majority but Labour still got over 40% vote share?
Very different - the Tories were still polling around 30% in the run-up to the 1997 GE.
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
In 2005, Labour got a 66 majority on 35%. Not a mega landslide, no, but good enough for all practical purposes.
The difference this time was that Reform got 14% and the Greens got 8%, in both cases without over-troubling the constituency scorers. Unless those percentages go down, or the parties involved get much better at playing the FPTP game, then the winning post is at a much lower percentage than we are used to.
That’s a useful way of looking at it. The higher the vote share for wasted vote parties that can’t play FPTP well, the lower the winning post.
Conversely the higher the seat count of extreme efficiency parties like the SNP, the higher the winning post. The SNP’s demise is one reason a large majority was possible on low share.
In 2005 the Lib Dems took the part of the greens and Reform. Decent seat tally but still nothing like as proportional as in 2024.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
Today's numbers. Starting to see some Trump leads in high-quality national polls, which is certainly not a great sign for Harris. Very close race, though."
Safe cities, secure borders and free speech etc. are a strong appeal to a Democrat ticket that just hasn't delivered in recent years.
It's just insane that they have let things get to the point that 48-52% people think such an unpleasant person is the better alternative. Even if they manage to squeeze a win, that's a real indictment of how things are - even if not as bad as some think, why do they think that? And media is not an excuse in itselfr.
If you think about it, all the opposing arguments have just been he's an asshole, a criminal, a threat and people supporting him are dumb.
But, if that's all you've got you've not got very much at all.
That's untrue, they have talked about his economic policies like on tariffs etc, pointing out he torpedoed a bipartisan deal on the border etc.
Also, those things are not 'not very much at all', even if they are indeed insufficient since, even if true, you need to go beyond that in order to get support. But it is not the case that policy reasons have not been brought up.
But they needed to do better, and not have some of the weaknesses they do hanging around their necks - they still don't really get why many back Trump.
But they're still fundamentally talking about Trump and Trump's ideas. He's setting the agenda and narrative which is why he seems to be winning. They're dancing to his tune, in 2020 Biden made it about himself and what he would do, not what he would stop Trump doing. Kamala is in some ways the incumbent, asking for 4 more years on the basis that the opponent might so something bad is a poor strategy and they really need to change it up or I think they're going to lose.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
Trump meets a Brazilian woman at the drive thru: “Mr. President, please don’t let the United States become Brazil!”
On topic: I think a hung parliament is most like at the next election but whether that yields a Lab-Lib government or a Con-Ref government is unknowable at the moment...
I think the equation is very simple. If Labour inflict all these tax rises and spend big on infrastructure, and we don't see significant growth, then yes. If instead in 4 years all these moves have led to growth, improvement in public services and people feeling better about their lives, nothing any other party promises matters.
I'm not sure... Even if everything goes amazingly well, I don't think the unique (bizarre) circumstances that came together to give Labour 170 majority on 33% of the vote will ever be seen again.
But that is assuming you won't attract any new voters. The last election was get the Tories out without people being particularly convinced by Starmer, so people were looking for who the hell do I need to vote for to get rid.
However, if Starmer / Reeves can prove to that can do a decent job, I don't think they will struggle to get a decent vote share that will keep a good majority. Tories managed to do that 2010 -> 2015.
An unloved Labour government that's disliked less than the alternative because loads of people aren't ready to forgive the disastrous past 14 years. Whose vote share ticks up while losing seats as the Tories' does a bit too, making it more a direct choice between the big two, maybe one of the most plausible outcomes of the next election.
Was there any proper studies done after the fact about risk of COVID to people based upon ethnicity that properly controlled for exposure etc? We had some breathless reporting in the first year of COVID and some politicians demanding special extra protection based upon ethnicity.
If I remember correctly the three main factors in the end were age, certain underlying health conditions and obesity. Much of the other differences e.g. early higher levels of death among certain groups, was simply down to who was being exposed.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
Maybe he's so confident he's already got the "swing states" that he's happy to waste his time in Cali?
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
I wonder if this the same 'disciplined' Trump that started going on about Arnold Palmer's penis at his last rally?
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
Maybe he's so confident he's already got the "swing states" that he's happy to waste his time in Cali?
If this time we end up with Trump winning the popular vote but Harris the EC I would not be surprised.
Fox's latest poll already suggested that 'Former President Trump is ahead of Vice President Kamala Harris in the presidential contest 50%-48%, according to a new Fox News national survey. That’s a reversal from last month, when Harris had a narrow advantage.
Harris, however, is ahead by 6 points among voters from the seven key battleground states (within the margin of error for that subsample), and the candidates are tied at 49% each among voters in close counties (where the Biden-Trump 2020 margin was less than 10 points). Trump’s advantage comes from a larger share in counties he won by more than 10 points in 2020 (64%-35%) than Harris has in counties Biden won by more than 10 points (58%-39%).' https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-trump-ahead-harris-2-points-nationally
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
Maybe he's so confident he's already got the "swing states" that he's happy to waste his time in Cali?
If this time we end up with Trump winning the popular vote but Harris the EC I would not be surprised
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
It was a stunt . The McDonalds was actually closed. But we can all be happy that Trump flipped a burger and is now a man of the people.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
There's a good discussion on the most recent Rest is Politics USA about this, well worth listening to.
On Harris, they worry that she's "Starmering" and will fall short because she's hasn't put out her optimistic vision of the future USA. On Trump, the "mooch" suggested that Trump campaigning in California, where he'll lose, is "vanity campaigning", he's trying to project huge confidence that he'll win to enthuse his base.
In summary, they think it's too close to call but that the more liberal Republican vote hasn't fallen away despite Trump.
Trump is underestimated, the conservative bias he appointed throughout the US judiciary will be there for decades.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
It was a stunt . The McDonalds was actually closed. But we can all be happy that Trump flipped a burger and is now a man of the people.
I'm not saying if it's fair or not, but the optics DO look good. There's no denying it!
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
There's a good discussion on the most recent Rest is Politics USA about this, well worth listening to.
On Harris, they worry that she's "Starmering" and will fall short because she's hasn't put out her optimistic vision of the future USA. On Trump, the "mooch" suggested that Trump campaigning in California, where he'll lose, is "vanity campaigning", he's trying to project huge confidence that he'll win to enthuse his base.
In summary, they think it's too close to call but that the more liberal Republican vote hasn't fallen away despite Trump.
Trump is underestimated, the conservative bias he appointed throughout the US judiciary will be there for decades.
Only if he wins, if he loses the Democrats would soon reverse it with appointments over the next term or 2
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
It was a stunt . The McDonalds was actually closed. But we can all be happy that Trump flipped a burger and is now a man of the people.
I'm not saying if it's fair or not, but the optics DO look good. There's no denying it!
It's part of the double standard that's applied in the media.
If Harris closed a McDonalds to do a publicity stunt the news would be about how she'd denied honest hard-working Americans their burger and fries for her politicking. Trump does it and it's a masterstroke.
The best thing about the US election is it makes you appreciate the relative sanity of our elections!
I do though of course like watching all the drama unfold and US election night has a lot more interest with so many sub-plots in terms of the Senate , House and Governor races .
The best thing about the US election is it makes you appreciate the relative sanity of our elections!
I do though of course like watching all the drama unfold and US election night has a lot more interest with so many sub-plots in terms of the Senate , House and Governor races .
This year I wouldn't worry about staying up for election night, on current polls it looks like election results fortnight before a clear EC winner is declared
The best thing about the US election is it makes you appreciate the relative sanity of our elections!
I do though of course like watching all the drama unfold and US election night has a lot more interest with so many sub-plots in terms of the Senate , House and Governor races .
This year I wouldn't worry about staying up for election night, on current polls it looks like election results fortnight before a clear EC winner is declared
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
It was a stunt . The McDonalds was actually closed. But we can all be happy that Trump flipped a burger and is now a man of the people.
The Lincoln Project @ProjectLincoln · 3h Good practice for his next job in the prison kitchen.
Jon Ralston @RalstonReports The early voting blog is updated!
Bottom line: Dems have a small lead, but Rs surely are bullish because lead was much bigger after one day in 2020. Clark firewall is very small, will need to get bigger or Harris in trouble.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
Trump meets a Brazilian woman at the drive thru: “Mr. President, please don’t let the United States become Brazil!”
Jon Ralston @RalstonReports The early voting blog is updated!
Bottom line: Dems have a small lead, but Rs surely are bullish because lead was much bigger after one day in 2020. Clark firewall is very small, will need to get bigger or Harris in trouble.
It’s much more difficult in this election because more GOP voters are voting early by mail and in person early so direct comparisons with previous cycles are more open to error.
90% of the vote comes from Clark county followed by Washoe. Biden won those last time and had a big enough lead to account for the rurals which are landslides for the GOP . It’s still just at the start of early voting and mail ballot returns so a way to go yet.
Jon Ralston @RalstonReports The early voting blog is updated!
Bottom line: Dems have a small lead, but Rs surely are bullish because lead was much bigger after one day in 2020. Clark firewall is very small, will need to get bigger or Harris in trouble.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
There's a good discussion on the most recent Rest is Politics USA about this, well worth listening to.
On Harris, they worry that she's "Starmering" and will fall short because she's hasn't put out her optimistic vision of the future USA. On Trump, the "mooch" suggested that Trump campaigning in California, where he'll lose, is "vanity campaigning", he's trying to project huge confidence that he'll win to enthuse his base.
In summary, they think it's too close to call but that the more liberal Republican vote hasn't fallen away despite Trump.
Trump is underestimated, the conservative bias he appointed throughout the US judiciary will be there for decades.
Only if he wins, if he loses the Democrats would soon reverse it with appointments over the next term or 2
For the SCOTUS they need them to die off and Senate approval of the nominee, for the lower courts they need Senate approval, Manchin refused to support nominations that had no Republican support, so, unlike the Republicans, the Dems can't make partisan appointments.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
There's a good discussion on the most recent Rest is Politics USA about this, well worth listening to.
On Harris, they worry that she's "Starmering" and will fall short because she's hasn't put out her optimistic vision of the future USA. On Trump, the "mooch" suggested that Trump campaigning in California, where he'll lose, is "vanity campaigning", he's trying to project huge confidence that he'll win to enthuse his base.
In summary, they think it's too close to call but that the more liberal Republican vote hasn't fallen away despite Trump.
Trump is underestimated, the conservative bias he appointed throughout the US judiciary will be there for decades.
The thing that must worry the Dems is how the Senate candidates don't want to be seen with Harris. In fact, the PA senator even put out an ad saying he agreed with Trump on certain things:
Every time something happened which we were told would dent Trump's popularity, like 6th January, I thought to myself this isn't going to make much difference to his level of support: because people aren't voting for him for positive reasons. It's almost entirely a protest vote. The only way to reduce his support is by tackling the root causes of the problems in the US.
They dont care that Trumps an a.sehole. They just hate the liberal elites and want to hurt them.
I believe you are correct and they are mainly unhappy people that are unable to do anything about making themselves content and will always play the blame game. They need to look at themselves and see where they can make improvements to their personality and improve their mental health which definitely needs rebalancing.
You are talking about at least 45% of the us population. This isnt some tiny minority.
We know in the last Trump election 52% of the voters eligible to vote did so. 48% of the electorate did not do. What is their state of mind? Have some of them given up on life and feel nobody will listen to them? America has a very high rate of depression and this benefits the pharmaceutical companies. The solution involves doing what many people in denial refuse to do. Taking a long cold hard look at yourself and being realistic about the state of your personality and making some changes to it which will help live a happier life. Some people are afraid of doing this. Family and having a support network helps people a lot as does exercise and enjoying the simple things. Perhaps we can learn from the communities that live on some Japanese and Greek islands. They also have a healthy diet and no takeaways!
In many states it isn't worth voting. It's like "safe seats" here.
The low turnout in July was particularly in Labour "safe seats" which no-one expected to flip Tory, so why bother voting?
Very late to the party, but yes. Bootle. One of the safest seats in the country. Peter Dowd lost 10,000 votes!
Was there any proper studies done after the fact about risk of COVID to people based upon ethnicity that properly controlled for exposure etc? We had some breathless reporting in the first year of COVID and some politicians demanding special extra protection based upon ethnicity.
If I remember correctly the three main factors in the end were age, certain underlying health conditions and obesity. Much of the other differences e.g. early higher levels of death among certain groups, was simply down to who was being exposed.
IIIRC, when COVID was running rampant before the first lockdown, the job that suffered the highest casualty rate, even higher than that of NHS workers, was to be a male security guard. And ethnic minorites are over-represented in the security business.
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
His problem is he has been running around California fundraising and then doing stunts like this while Harris and her campaign are relentlessly focused on swing states, as with her appearance in a Georgia church today and building up a GOTV effort in those swing states.
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
There's a good discussion on the most recent Rest is Politics USA about this, well worth listening to.
On Harris, they worry that she's "Starmering" and will fall short because she's hasn't put out her optimistic vision of the future USA. On Trump, the "mooch" suggested that Trump campaigning in California, where he'll lose, is "vanity campaigning", he's trying to project huge confidence that he'll win to enthuse his base.
In summary, they think it's too close to call but that the more liberal Republican vote hasn't fallen away despite Trump.
Trump is underestimated, the conservative bias he appointed throughout the US judiciary will be there for decades.
Only if he wins, if he loses the Democrats would soon reverse it with appointments over the next term or 2
For the SCOTUS they need them to die off and Senate approval of the nominee, for the lower courts they need Senate approval, Manchin refused to support nominations that had no Republican support, so, unlike the Republicans, the Dems can't make partisan appointments.
They can, they just need to keep the Senate too. Obama and Clinton made plenty of liberal SC judge appointments
Now, I know it's sacrilege on PB to say anything positive about Donald Trump, but I have to say the footage of him "working" in McDonalds that's all over social media today looks very good.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
It looks like he's actually taking advice from people who know what they're doing, instead of making it all up himself like he was doing before.
One sends one’s thoughts and prayers to the PB Tories who remain scarred by CURRYGATE, and now have to face this.
Your guy is rapidly appearing to be a duffer. He's better than Johnson and Truss, but - as I think you keep on point out - he has a mahoosive majority, yet keeps on making pratfall after pratfall. Unforced errors abound in this government.
As I've said before, we need to give them time to settle in. But the messes they've got themselves into are absolutely hilarious. The question is whether he, and his government, will learn from those messes.
I hope he does, as the country needs some stability for a while.
LOL. What has he done now? Moved another painting?
You really need to keep up with the news, or check your memory. Do you think his government has got off to a faultless start?
I wonder what SKS would have to do before you strongly criticise him.
I am merely asking what is the latest rick on the Curry-Donkey-Swift continuum. I know it’s important. I just struggle to keep up.
Your reply shows exactly why Labour may fail. No acknowledgement that they've made missteps; no understanding. In fact, no fucking clue.
If the Conservatives weren't in such a hideous state (with few signs of recovery...) then Labour would be in real trouble.
The country deserves better. I hope Labour improve.
The nit-picking from the Tory press and its acolytes here is becoming tedious. Just because he didn’t go to a public school and ‘only’ went to Oxford’ for postgraduate studies.
???
Speaking personally, AFAICR I've never criticised him because he did not go to a public school, and ditto Oxford (though being a fan of Cambridge, that took some restraint...)
SKS is getting criticised because he is making stupid mistakes that take shine off his reputation; not tha he had a lot to begin with. And mistakes which appear, at best, silly. In the case of the good Lord Alli, they appear somewhat worse.
What has he done to trigger this latest round of pearl-clutching? Is it something to do with paintings again?
Nah. Starmer's just a prat and its clear for all to see
What is precise source for your statement that overall BC 2024 results "has come down to about 90 votes in two constituencies"?
Because I think that (based on official published numbers) that it's more like 125 votes in 2 ridings, namely San Juan - Malahat (on Vancover Island) and Surrey - Guildford (Suburban Vancouver)
IF the Conservative candidate manages to squeek by the Dipper in Juan da Fuca - Malahat, then you can add it to list of ridings where Green vote was decisive; current situation now
> Juan da Fuca - Malahat NDP = 38.5%, Con = 38.4%, Green = 23.0% note that as of now, NDP leading by +23 votes
CBC - When will we know more about B.C.'s tight provincial election? Less than 0.3% of results remain to be made official after Saturday, but up to 11 ridings could be in play
. . . . As of Sunday, the NDP were leading or elected in 46 seats, the Conservatives in 45 seats and the B.C. Greens were elected in two seats. In the B.C. Legislature, 47 seats are required to form a majority government.
However, based on preliminary results, CBC News has not projected the winners of 11 ridings — with the NDP leading in six of those, and the Conservatives in five. . . . [Final results are] subject to an automatic recount [in] ridings where the margin of victory is 100 votes or less . . . [one riding = Juan da Fuca - Malahat, where NDP leads CON by +23 votes]. Final counting period [is] between Oct. 26 and 28, according to Elections B.C. . . .
The NDP's Adrian Dix, incumbent health minister and the winner of the Vancouver-Renfrew riding, said that Saturday's election mirrored the 2017 election — which eventually saw the NDP form a minority government through a confidence and supply agreement with the Greens. . . .
"This is an extremely close election. The elections in B.C., really all my lifetime, have been four per cent either way — and this was no exception," he told the CBC. . . . Dix said that the NDP's preliminary popular vote share, at 44.5 per cent, was the third-highest in the party's nearly century-long history. . . .
Peter Milobar, who won as a Conservative candidate in Kamloops Centre and was previously a long-time B.C. Liberal MLA for the area, said . . . "Things could swing so dramatically one way or the other, in terms of is it a minority government, is it a majority," . . . .
Milobar said he had had conversations with Conservative Leader John Rustad after Saturday, but that talks about potentially forming an alliance with the Greens would be had by the leader and not him.
CBC News reached out to the newly elected B.C. Green MLAs and party Leader Sonia Furstenau for an interview Sunday, but they declined requests.
How the actual fuck have a year of Islamist protests been allowed, everywhere, since Oct 7?
They are quite careful about keeping themselves within the law. I don't think it is very helpful to the left in the long run.
They chant genocidal chants
"From the river to the sea" means something
They're putting Intifada into their chants
They're targeting Jewish businesses
They hate the Jews
I was one of the few people banging the drum on this last year. On the first chant I generally agree but it's difficult to prove. On the second I'm surprised they get way with it. And anyone targeting Jewish businesses should be dealt with by the law.
How the actual fuck have a year of Islamist protests been allowed, everywhere, since Oct 7?
They are quite careful about keeping themselves within the law. I don't think it is very helpful to the left in the long run.
I mean lots very much aren't careful about staying within the law (pro Hamas or Hezbollah signs or rhetoric, all seen with alarming regularity for example, aren't) but of course there's some understandable and contestable ambiguity about some things. While the police often don't know what crosses the line and why - especially true when it's being chanted in another language - and favour public order policing over wading in and making arrests, which protesters and organisers often use to take a mile.
More re: BC GE24 from CBC - No clear winner in B.C. election race between NDP, Conservatives
. . . . The razor-thin result means the race will come down to the final polls, out-of-district votes and mail in ballots. The latter aren't expected to be fully counted until Oct. 26. . . .results came after an unusually antagonistic election campaign characterized by the growing popularity of the right-of-centre Conservatives, which had tried to convince a broad base of disillusioned voters to reject the status quo after seven years of NDP rule.
Regardless of which party ultimately forms government, the close race will be considered a disappointing result for the once-dominant NDP and a once-unthinkable accomplishment for the up-and-coming Conservatives.
"This has been a very, very hard fought campaign and we knew that every vote would matter and that has certainly been the case," NDP Leader David Eby told supporters just before 11:30 p.m. PT. "And it looks like we're going to have to wait just a little bit longer."
Addressing his own crowd minutes earlier, Conservatives Leader John Rustad said the election was a "historic night." "This has been a night where we have seen the political landscape in British Columbia change forever ... we have not given up this fight yet. We are going to keep pushing hard."
Both Eby and Rustad held onto their ridings: Rustad was re-elected in Nechako Lakes, which he has held since 2005, and Eby won a fourth term in Vancouver–Point Grey. In a major blow to her party, B.C. Green Party leader Sonia Furstenau lost her seat after leaving her riding of Cowichan Valley to run for the first time in Victoria–Beacon Hill.
"It has been such an honour to be an MLA," an emotional Furstenau later told supporters gathered in the capital, her voice hoarse after fighting a cold last weekend. "It's not the outcome we hoped for in Victoria–Beacon Hill tonight, but I'm so proud of the campaign that we ran."
. . . Furstenau said the [Green] party could potentially play a "pivotal role" in the next government. B.C. was left with similar uncertainty after the provincial election in 2017, when election night ended with another too-close-to-call race between the NDP and then-B.C. Liberals.
Former Liberals leader Christy Clark promised to lead a minority government after the race, but resigned weeks later after losing a confidence vote. The NDP's John Horgan became premier after signing a confidence and supply agreement with the support of the three Green members of the Legislature.
Together, the two parties had a total of 44 seats — the minimum required at that time for a majority.
I just had my first job interview with Applicant AI's video recruiter
It lets companies pre-screen applicants with AI video calls to assess applicants
Answers are immediately transcribed and saved for companies to review
One big reason to do this is ironically AI:
We're fighting AI applicants with AI recruiters
Because jobs these days get thousands of auto applicants by AI and video calls are a great way to filter out over 90% of those immediately
There are already a couple of companies that can provide AI digital doubles that work live for webcams. So we could end up with an AI digital double interviewing an AI digital double to try and screen out AI digital doubles...both using a LLM to provide question / answers....
Looks like Moldova may have voted No to joining the EU by around 55% to 45%.
Has tightened to 53% Da versus 53% Nu, with 92.3% counted, according to Central Electoral Commission, Republic of Moldova.
Based on map, Chișinău the capital has NOT yet reported along with some more rural locals, and also Transnistria which should NOT be reporting any votes; also none yet from some minority (non-Romanian) districts in far south, but unsure of Moldova govt writ runs down their.
Trump. He wont make four years. Prepare for President Vance.
'Bibi called me this morning. And he's obviously got things going well. He likes to hear what I have to say,' later clarifying that the call was Saturday."
Rebecca Ballhaus @rebeccaballhaus · 7h In Maricopa County, votes will be counted with drones overhead and police snipers standing ready. Election workers have gone through active-shooter drills and learned to barricade themselves or wield fire hoses to repel armed mobs.
Are the pro-Palestine folk on here Zionists who want a two state solution, or anti-Zionists who want Israel wiped out?
Or are you all too scared to say?
I'm a Zionist
Does Zionism envisage a two-state solution?
I think there might be alternatives to the two options you present.
Yes. There are certain Zionists who don't want a two state solution, or others who fear it's impossible as Palestinians will never accept Israel's existence - but Zionism as originally envisioned in practice in 1948 was the two state solution of partition. The Arabs rejected it and went to war to prevent Israel's creation, and lost.
Looks like Moldova may have voted No to joining the EU by around 55% to 45%.
Has tightened to 53% Da versus 53% Nu, with 92.3% counted, according to Central Electoral Commission, Republic of Moldova.
Based on map, Chișinău the capital has NOT yet reported along with some more rural locals, and also Transnistria which should NOT be reporting any votes; also none yet from some minority (non-Romanian) districts in far south, but unsure of Moldova govt writ runs down their.
Looks like Moldova may have voted No to joining the EU by around 55% to 45%.
Sandu should win the Presidential election comfortably even if it has to go to a run off. She is already claiming massive vote buying on the EU related vote (and she's not known for Trumpian rhetoric).
Looks like Moldova may have voted No to joining the EU by around 55% to 45%.
Has tightened to 53% Da versus 53% Nu, with 92.3% counted, according to Central Electoral Commission, Republic of Moldova.
Based on map, Chișinău the capital has NOT yet reported along with some more rural locals, and also Transnistria which should NOT be reporting any votes; also none yet from some minority (non-Romanian) districts in far south, but unsure of Moldova govt writ runs down their.
I've heard other portraits are due to come down too...
Horatio Nelson: he’s been put up on a pedestal – literally – for fighting colonial wars. The guy is practically the poster boy for imperialism. Yes, he won at Trafalgar, but at what cost? Dominating other nations under the guise of "national pride"? He’s the embodiment of old-school, white-male-dominated militarism, and was outspoken in his support for the slave trade, which, let’s be real, has no place in the more compassionate, decolonised Britain we’re building today. Also, why all the statues? Can’t we just treat him with a quick TikTok putdown instead? Beast.
Florence Nightingale: yes, the ‘Lady with the Lamp’ – but how many lamps did she carry for colonialism? Nightingale’s work in the Crimea was part of a military-industrial complex that propped up British imperialism, and we can't overlook the structural racism of her era. Also, let’s not ignore that her "heroic" image overshadows other nurses, especially those from the Global South, who were left out of the narrative. This isn’t about erasing history – it's about correcting the glaring gaps in it.
Isaac Newton: ah, the “genius” who discovered gravity – like it wasn’t there all along. But have we considered the class implications of a man who spent his entire life sitting under trees and developing theories in a Cambridge college? It reeks of privilege. How many working-class people had the luxury of pondering the universe while picking apples? And that’s before we even get into his work for the Royal Mint, helping to prop up the economic system that kept wealth concentrated in the hands of the elite.
Charles Darwin: Darwin? He’s often held up as a scientific hero, but let’s talk about the social Darwinism his theories inspired. The very idea that some species, or worse, some people, are "naturally" superior to others? That’s been used to justify colonialism, capitalism, and eugenics. Plus, why was he exploring far-off islands anyway? Can’t we celebrate local biodiversity? Surely we’ve got enough pigeons and badgers to study here without disrupting vulnerable ecosystems abroad.
The Duke of Wellington: Beat Napoleon, did he? But wasn’t he just another aristocrat fighting wars to maintain the class status quo? Wellington fought for an outdated, hierarchical system that kept the rich rich and the poor poor. Sure, he might have kept Britain free from French dominance, but he wasn’t exactly advocating for universal suffrage, was he? The Battle of Waterloo? Honestly, it's just glorified warmongering. In a modern context, he’d probably be defending the House of Lords or complaining about wind farms ruining his estate views. Good job we're kicking his descendants out. About bloody time.
A genuine LOL from me here.
Princess Diana: obviously part of the hereditary system even before she married a prominent member of the monarchy. Spent lots of time on jollies around the world (better than the ones I get to go on!), and her campaigns on AIDS and landmines outshone the contributions of more working-class people. A lady with every advantage in life, her only redeeming feature was going out with an ethnic minority late in her life.
Moldova is going to vote to join the EU, no is about 20k ahead, but the remaining votes are from emigrants who will stick yes over the top by about 40k in the end
Are the pro-Palestine folk on here Zionists who want a two state solution, or anti-Zionists who want Israel wiped out?
Or are you all too scared to say?
I'm a Zionist
Does Zionism envisage a two-state solution?
I think there might be alternatives to the two options you present.
Zionism means that a Jewish state exists
Islamism necessarily precludes it
That's why Palestinians elected Hamas when they got the chance to vote
Above everything else they hate the Jews and want them dead
Sadly for the innocent Palestinians, their Hamas rulers want them dead. They actually say this: we want children to die to make you idiots pity us
So they put children in the front line and you idiots pity them
What are the borders of said Jewish state?
Make your mind up on that, and then treat all the inhabitants of said state the same, irrespective of their religious beliefs. And then let the people who don't live in said state, have their own state.
Moldova is going to vote to join the EU, no is about 20k ahead, but the remaining votes are from emigrants who will stick yes over the top by about 40k in the end
Aren't they going to vote yes to a constitutional amendment that enshrines a desire to join the EU, rather than actually joining the EU?
After backing out of interviews with 60 Minutes, CNBC and other U.S. news programs, Donald Trump sat down for an interview with a Saudi government-owned news channel. The interview, which will air today, comes as his family's business ties with the kingdom have grown. https://x.com/joncoopertweets/status/1848038592624398436
The truth is that Trump is cosplaying a strong man; he's in it for the money. The Presidency is probably the only really profitable gig he's ever had.
I watch history videos quite a lot, and was surprised this particular channel had one about Ben Shapiro being wrong (apparently he's been talking about the end of the [Western] Roman Empire): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMeWsh7H6RI
I recently read Hans-Ulrich Wiemer's biography of Theoderic (who ruled Rome/Italy after the Odoacer, who ousted the last Western emperor). Imperial structures including the class structure and tax system continued to function essentially unchanged from the empire. The army did change, although given Theoderic's kingdom was military safe and even expanded its borders, the Romans within the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy seemed ok with that.
Are the pro-Palestine folk on here Zionists who want a two state solution, or anti-Zionists who want Israel wiped out?
Or are you all too scared to say?
I'm a Zionist
Does Zionism envisage a two-state solution?
I think there might be alternatives to the two options you present.
Yes. There are certain Zionists who don't want a two state solution, or others who fear it's impossible as Palestinians will never accept Israel's existence - but Zionism as originally envisioned in practice in 1948 was the two state solution of partition. The Arabs rejected it and went to war to prevent Israel's creation, and lost.
".. as originally envisaged in practice in 1948 .." is a weird way to refer to a specific point in time 76 years ago for a movement that started in the 19th century.
Israel has occupied the West Bank and Gaza for 57 years. I think that if Zionism was committed to the two-state solution then it would have happened by now.
We should stop pretending that the two-state solution is going to happen. The Palestinians are never going to have a sovereign independent state. Such a state's existence would very obviously be seen as a threat to Israel's security.
Miss JGP, normally I'd agree on the narrow margin being not a great basis for serious action is a valid view. But given how much Russia seems to have been trying to influence things, getting the hell away from that seems a very good thing.
Even the actual Nazis didn't make their own children into suicide meat the way thaHamas have
They certainly sent them to the front line. I Visited the German war grave in Mertzwiller, scenes of some vicious battles towards the end of the war, when I worked out there and it was notable just how young so many of the dead were. Plenty under 16.
Remaining votes were all (or at least mainly) expats - whose vote so far is overwhemingly Yes. So it appears that Yes is probably on course to win.
Our own experience seems to suggest that significant action taken on an extremely close result isn't altogether a good thing.
Good morning, everyone.
That’s thanks to a very effective Russian vote buying operation across most of rural Moldova. Despite that they still didn’t manage to defeat the result.
But they will now argue that 49% of Moldova is pro joining the Russian world. That’s how Kremlin binary thinking works. Including transnistria, they’ll say, the majority of Moldova wishes to reunite with the motherland. And so the stage is set. Moldova will be a much softer target than Ukraine. They probably really could overwhelm it in 3 days.
I watch history videos quite a lot, and was surprised this particular channel had one about Ben Shapiro being wrong (apparently he's been talking about the end of the [Western] Roman Empire): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMeWsh7H6RI
I recently read Hans-Ulrich Wiemer's biography of Theoderic (who ruled Rome/Italy after the Odoacer, who ousted the last Western emperor). Imperial structures including the class structure and tax system continued to function essentially unchanged from the empire. The army did change, although given Theoderic's kingdom was military safe and even expanded its borders, the Romans within the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy seemed ok with that.
Given the the “barbarians” were either Roman state employees, or from the same cultural group as the state employees in question (foreign military, hired), it is entirely unsurprising that they thought in terms of a hostile take over.
Rome was, in addition, explicitly run by the rich. No one was elected to the Senate in its entire history. So it was largely a management change. And the previous C-Suite had been running things very badly for a long time.
Remaining votes were all (or at least mainly) expats - whose vote so far is overwhemingly Yes. So it appears that Yes is probably on course to win.
Our own experience seems to suggest that significant action taken on an extremely close result isn't altogether a good thing.
Good morning, everyone.
That’s thanks to a very effective Russian vote buying operation across most of rural Moldova. Despite that they still didn’t manage to defeat the result.
But they will now argue that 49% of Moldova is pro joining the Russian world. That’s how Kremlin binary thinking works. Including transnistria, they’ll say, the majority of Moldova wishes to reunite with the motherland. And so the stage is set. Moldova will be a much softer target than Ukraine. They probably really could overwhelm it in 3 days.
I'd have liked your reply as I did @Morris_Dancer 's but a like on your 2nd paragraph seems wildly inappropriate.
I wasn't aware of the circumstances, so thank you both.
Comments
The difference this time was that Reform got 14% and the Greens got 8%, in both cases without over-troubling the constituency scorers. Unless those percentages go down, or the parties involved get much better at playing the FPTP game, then the winning post is at a much lower percentage than we are used to.
However, if Starmer / Reeves can prove to that can do a decent job, I don't think they will struggle to get a decent vote share that will keep a good majority. Tories managed to do that 2010 -> 2015.
But I can't see it, honestly lol!
Conversely the higher the seat count of extreme efficiency parties like the SNP, the higher the winning post. The SNP’s demise is one reason a large majority was possible on low share.
In 2005 the Lib Dems took the part of the greens and Reform. Decent seat tally but still nothing like as proportional as in 2024.
Overall, I think Trump's campaign in 2024 has been much better and much more disciplined than his previous campaigns - Indeed I'd say he looks more "Presidential" now than he did in 2020 when he was actually running as President? 🤷♂️
https://x.com/margommartin/status/1848073834475229510
In 2016 Trump was much more focused on swing states and it was Hillary making the fundraising trips to the coasts
Fox's latest poll already suggested that 'Former President Trump is ahead of Vice President Kamala Harris in the presidential contest 50%-48%, according to a new Fox News national survey. That’s a reversal from last month, when Harris had a narrow advantage.
Harris, however, is ahead by 6 points among voters from the seven key battleground states (within the margin of error for that subsample), and the candidates are tied at 49% each among voters in close counties (where the Biden-Trump 2020 margin was less than 10 points). Trump’s advantage comes from a larger share in counties he won by more than 10 points in 2020 (64%-35%) than Harris has in counties Biden won by more than 10 points (58%-39%).'
https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-trump-ahead-harris-2-points-nationally
On Harris, they worry that she's "Starmering" and will fall short because she's hasn't put out her optimistic vision of the future USA.
On Trump, the "mooch" suggested that Trump campaigning in California, where he'll lose, is "vanity campaigning", he's trying to project huge confidence that he'll win to enthuse his base.
In summary, they think it's too close to call but that the more liberal Republican vote hasn't fallen away despite Trump.
Trump is underestimated, the conservative bias he appointed throughout the US judiciary will be there for decades.
https://x.com/maryltrump/status/1848097196450701404?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
If Harris closed a McDonalds to do a publicity stunt the news would be about how she'd denied honest hard-working Americans their burger and fries for her politicking. Trump does it and it's a masterstroke.
I do though of course like watching all the drama unfold and US election night has a lot more interest with so many sub-plots in terms of the Senate , House and Governor races .
The Lincoln Project
@ProjectLincoln
·
3h
Good practice for his next job in the prison kitchen.
Jon Ralston
@RalstonReports
The early voting blog is updated!
Bottom line: Dems have a small lead, but Rs surely are bullish because lead was much bigger after one day in 2020. Clark firewall is very small, will need to get bigger or Harris in trouble.
Lots of charts, data.
https://x.com/RalstonReports/status/1848040543231652016
90% of the vote comes from Clark county followed by Washoe. Biden won those last time and had a big enough lead to account for the rurals which are landslides for the GOP . It’s still just at the start of early voting and mail ballot returns so a way to go yet.
How the fuck did that happen?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyvRRJhsfP8
Or are you all too scared to say?
I'm a Zionist
"From the river to the sea" means something
They're putting Intifada into their chants
They're targeting Jewish businesses
They hate the Jews
Less than 0.3% of results remain to be made official after Saturday, but up to 11 ridings could be in play
. . . . As of Sunday, the NDP were leading or elected in 46 seats, the Conservatives in 45 seats and the B.C. Greens were elected in two seats. In the B.C. Legislature, 47 seats are required to form a majority government.
However, based on preliminary results, CBC News has not projected the winners of 11 ridings — with the NDP leading in six of those, and the Conservatives in five. . . . [Final results are] subject to an automatic recount [in] ridings where the margin of victory is 100 votes or less . . . [one riding = Juan da Fuca - Malahat, where NDP leads CON by +23 votes]. Final counting period [is] between Oct. 26 and 28, according to Elections B.C. . . .
The NDP's Adrian Dix, incumbent health minister and the winner of the Vancouver-Renfrew riding, said that Saturday's election mirrored the 2017 election — which eventually saw the NDP form a minority government through a confidence and supply agreement with the Greens. . . .
"This is an extremely close election. The elections in B.C., really all my lifetime, have been four per cent either way — and this was no exception," he told the CBC. . . . Dix said that the NDP's preliminary popular vote share, at 44.5 per cent, was the third-highest in the party's nearly century-long history. . . .
Peter Milobar, who won as a Conservative candidate in Kamloops Centre and was previously a long-time B.C. Liberal MLA for the area, said . . . "Things could swing so dramatically one way or the other, in terms of is it a minority government, is it a majority," . . . .
Milobar said he had had conversations with Conservative Leader John Rustad after Saturday, but that talks about potentially forming an alliance with the Greens would be had by the leader and not him.
CBC News reached out to the newly elected B.C. Green MLAs and party Leader Sonia Furstenau for an interview Sunday, but they declined requests.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-election-2024-what-happens-now-1.7357615
. . . . The razor-thin result means the race will come down to the final polls, out-of-district votes and mail in ballots. The latter aren't expected to be fully counted until Oct. 26. . . .results came after an unusually antagonistic election campaign characterized by the growing popularity of the right-of-centre Conservatives, which had tried to convince a broad base of disillusioned voters to reject the status quo after seven years of NDP rule.
Regardless of which party ultimately forms government, the close race will be considered a disappointing result for the once-dominant NDP and a once-unthinkable accomplishment for the up-and-coming Conservatives.
"This has been a very, very hard fought campaign and we knew that every vote would matter and that has certainly been the case," NDP Leader David Eby told supporters just before 11:30 p.m. PT. "And it looks like we're going to have to wait just a little bit longer."
Addressing his own crowd minutes earlier, Conservatives Leader John Rustad said the election was a "historic night." "This has been a night where we have seen the political landscape in British Columbia change forever ... we have not given up this fight yet. We are going to keep pushing hard."
Both Eby and Rustad held onto their ridings: Rustad was re-elected in Nechako Lakes, which he has held since 2005, and Eby won a fourth term in Vancouver–Point Grey. In a major blow to her party, B.C. Green Party leader Sonia Furstenau lost her seat after leaving her riding of Cowichan Valley to run for the first time in Victoria–Beacon Hill.
"It has been such an honour to be an MLA," an emotional Furstenau later told supporters gathered in the capital, her voice hoarse after fighting a cold last weekend. "It's not the outcome we hoped for in Victoria–Beacon Hill tonight, but I'm so proud of the campaign that we ran."
. . . Furstenau said the [Green] party could potentially play a "pivotal role" in the next government. B.C. was left with similar uncertainty after the provincial election in 2017, when election night ended with another too-close-to-call race between the NDP and then-B.C. Liberals.
Former Liberals leader Christy Clark promised to lead a minority government after the race, but resigned weeks later after losing a confidence vote. The NDP's John Horgan became premier after signing a confidence and supply agreement with the support of the three Green members of the Legislature.
Together, the two parties had a total of 44 seats — the minimum required at that time for a majority.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-election-results-2024-1.7357408
I think there might be alternatives to the two options you present.
Based on map, Chișinău the capital has NOT yet reported along with some more rural locals, and also Transnistria which should NOT be reporting any votes; also none yet from some minority (non-Romanian) districts in far south, but unsure of Moldova govt writ runs down their.
https://pv.cec.md/cec-template-referendum-results.html
'Bibi called me this morning. And he's obviously got things going well. He likes to hear what I have to say,' later clarifying that the call was Saturday."
Mail online
Islamism necessarily precludes it
That's why Palestinians elected Hamas when they got the chance to vote
Above everything else they hate the Jews and want them dead
Sadly for the innocent Palestinians, their Hamas rulers want them dead. They actually say this: we want children to die to make you idiots pity us
So they put children in the front line and you idiots pity them
Rebecca Ballhaus
@rebeccaballhaus
·
7h
In Maricopa County, votes will be counted with drones overhead and police snipers standing ready. Election workers have gone through active-shooter drills and learned to barricade themselves or wield fire hoses to repel armed mobs.
https://x.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1848030534498177169
You all want Israel to exist, even if you hate the settlers in the West Bank
But for some reason you can't oppose the genocidal chants
https://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-support-for-hamas-on-the-rise-among-palestinians-now-double-fatahs/
All that has happened is that both sides have become more embittered and the two state solution is even more remote.
They say "we need civilian casualties so that you'll be on our side"
And you blame the Jews
Make your mind up on that, and then treat all the inhabitants of said state the same, irrespective of their religious beliefs. And then let the people who don't live in said state, have their own state.
When it went down the position was:
Yes 49.89%
No 50.11%
98% counted
Remaining votes were all (or at least mainly) expats - whose vote so far is overwhemingly Yes. So it appears that Yes is probably on course to win.
https://x.com/joncoopertweets/status/1848038592624398436
The truth is that Trump is cosplaying a strong man; he's in it for the money. The Presidency is probably the only really profitable gig he's ever had.
The US ought be be asking whose pockets he's in.
F1: to my surprise, the hedge on Sainz to win at 3 came off. Gosh.
Also, an exciting race. But I think it's weird Norris can still be laid at 5.7 which is lower than when I hedged my 29 on him to take the title.
https://bsky.app/profile/europeelects.bsky.social/post/3l6yt3q4rac2n
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMeWsh7H6RI
I recently read Hans-Ulrich Wiemer's biography of Theoderic (who ruled Rome/Italy after the Odoacer, who ousted the last Western emperor). Imperial structures including the class structure and tax system continued to function essentially unchanged from the empire. The army did change, although given Theoderic's kingdom was military safe and even expanded its borders, the Romans within the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy seemed ok with that.
Good morning, everyone.
Israel has occupied the West Bank and Gaza for 57 years. I think that if Zionism was committed to the two-state solution then it would have happened by now.
We should stop pretending that the two-state solution is going to happen. The Palestinians are never going to have a sovereign independent state. Such a state's existence would very obviously be seen as a threat to Israel's security.
But they will now argue that 49% of Moldova is pro joining the Russian world. That’s how Kremlin binary thinking works. Including transnistria, they’ll say, the majority of Moldova wishes to reunite with the motherland. And so the stage is set. Moldova will be a much softer target than Ukraine. They probably really could overwhelm it in 3 days.
What the heck!?
Donald Trump suffers a serious 16 minute freeze at his Michigan rally, wandering from side to side on the stage.
Trump’s cognitive decline is accelerating.
https://x.com/CalltoActivism/status/1848136199963078905
Rome was, in addition, explicitly run by the rich. No one was elected to the Senate in its entire history. So it was largely a management change. And the previous C-Suite had been running things very badly for a long time.
I still think she'll be ahead in the popular vote.
PJ O’Rourke’s brilliant merging of a tour through the region with the story of Josephus comes to mind.
I wasn't aware of the circumstances, so thank you both.