politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Powerful from The New York Times – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,126
edited October 27 in General
imagePowerful from The New York Times – politicalbetting.com

But will it shift any/many votes? I have my doubts.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    edited October 27
    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,297
    I love this because there's a scenario out there in which Big Village is 2028's AtlasIntel... "the MOST ACCURATE pollster of 2024 says", "the only pollster to CORRECTLY PREDICT the Harris landslide"

    #New General election poll

    🔵 Harris 52% (+7)
    🔴 Trump 45%

    Last poll - 🔵 Harris +4

    Big village #C - 1592 LV - 10/23

    https://x.com/OwenWntr/status/1850567164572442631
  • theakestheakes Posts: 928
    Polls, Polls, Polls, why are we such claves to them when at the end they are always that much out.
    The election is over really, the Republicans have it in the bag. We can but just hope they can restrain Trump again.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,283
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,418
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    I mean you have literally no idea whether it has failed or not. We will find out in a few weeks.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,696
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,297
    This season Liverpool have scored as many Premier League goals at Old Trafford as Manchester United.

    Bonkers to think we are about to enter November.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,788
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Very possible.

    But, alas, it does not address the issue of whether he is scary or not

    A point I think should be attended to more. So let's ask some Americans

    @Jim_Miller , @SeaShantyIrish2 , you are Americans. It currently looks as if Donald Trump is going to be the next POTUS. Are you afraid of this outcome (for yourself or your friends) and if so why?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    bondegezou said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
    Do you disagree with this?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/jd-vance-negotiating-russia-necessary-ending-ukraine-war-rcna177479

    “I think it’s important if we’re ever going to end the war in Ukraine, fundamentally, at some level, we’re going to have to engage in some sort of negotiation between Ukraine, between Russia, between our NATO allies in Europe,” the senator added. “And that’s just a necessary part.”
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,723
    I don't think it's designed to shift many votes, the NYT editorial board are surely self-aware enough to realise who their audience is. Which is why they've done it - because it's quite an easy way to gain a load of subscribers who've just cancelled their Washington Post.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,462
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I love this because there's a scenario out there in which Big Village is 2028's AtlasIntel... "the MOST ACCURATE pollster of 2024 says", "the only pollster to CORRECTLY PREDICT the Harris landslide"

    #New General election poll

    🔵 Harris 52% (+7)
    🔴 Trump 45%

    Last poll - 🔵 Harris +4

    Big village #C - 1592 LV - 10/23

    https://x.com/OwenWntr/status/1850567164572442631

    Thanks for adding the last poll numbers. All too many American pollsters fail to do this.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,723
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,462
    bondegezou said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
    William’s breathless arse-licking of Trump rather undermines his performative ‘support’ for Ukraine.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,473
    viewcode said:

    theakes said:

    Polls, Polls, Polls, why are we such claves to them when at the end they are always that much out.
    The election is over really, the Republicans have it in the bag. We can but just hope they can restrain Trump again.

    • 2004: Kerry was certain to win. He lost
    • 2015: UKGE was certain to be a tie. It wasn't
    • 2017: Theresa May was certain to get a majority. She didn't
    It really isn't over until the last day.
    Or in the USA until a few days or weeks later.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205
    williamglenn said:

    bondegezou said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
    Do you disagree with this?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/jd-vance-negotiating-russia-necessary-ending-ukraine-war-rcna177479

    “I think it’s important if we’re ever going to end the war in Ukraine, fundamentally, at some level, we’re going to have to engage in some sort of negotiation between Ukraine, between Russia, between our NATO allies in Europe,” the senator added. “And that’s just a necessary part.”
    Of course there should be negotiations. It's just that the USA plays a massive role in that, and especially in what form the 'negotiations' take.

    President 1: the basis of our negotiations is that Ukraine should get back as much territory as possible, including Crimea.

    President 2: the basis of our negotiations is that Ukraine should give up as much as possible so I can say I got 'peace', however temporary that peace is.

    I think you're a despicable twunt to pretend to support Ukraine (as in your profile pic) and also support Trump. The two are utterly incompatible positions.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,473
    edited October 27
    williamglenn said:

    bondegezou said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
    Do you disagree with this?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/jd-vance-negotiating-russia-necessary-ending-ukraine-war-rcna177479

    “I think it’s important if we’re ever going to end the war in Ukraine, fundamentally, at some level, we’re going to have to engage in some sort of negotiation between Ukraine, between Russia, between our NATO allies in Europe,” the senator added. “And that’s just a necessary part.”
    Let me guess, was that Neville Chamberlain, only that you updated the countries from Germany and Czechoslovakia?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is weird, and he is scary.
    It’s not a tactic.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 663
    Which of these did he do when he was in charge? And which of these had the Democrats done against him?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    There's a biopic out about Trump's early years called 'Apprentice'. In it Trump is shown -among other things-to be a pervert and a rapist.

    Just 'Weird' sounds pretty flattering

  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,213
    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    Foxy said:

    williamglenn said:

    bondegezou said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
    Do you disagree with this?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/jd-vance-negotiating-russia-necessary-ending-ukraine-war-rcna177479

    “I think it’s important if we’re ever going to end the war in Ukraine, fundamentally, at some level, we’re going to have to engage in some sort of negotiation between Ukraine, between Russia, between our NATO allies in Europe,” the senator added. “And that’s just a necessary part.”
    Let me guess, was that Neville Chamberlain, only that you updated the countries from Germany and Czechoslovakia?
    Neville Chamberlain was far tougher on Germany than Biden has been on Russia.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 663
    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    She is worse than every single predecessor who has won the nomination to be a presidential candidate, with the exception of the person she is standing against.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    williamglenn said:

    bondegezou said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    Then bye-bye Ukraine. You heard what Vance said.
    Do you disagree with this?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/jd-vance-negotiating-russia-necessary-ending-ukraine-war-rcna177479

    “I think it’s important if we’re ever going to end the war in Ukraine, fundamentally, at some level, we’re going to have to engage in some sort of negotiation between Ukraine, between Russia, between our NATO allies in Europe,” the senator added. “And that’s just a necessary part.”
    There’s plenty of motherhood and apple pie pabulum that’s hard to disagree with. Give peace a chance, etc.

    But we’ve seen the VP candidate regularly crap on Ukraine “I don’t care about it”, insult Zelensky, and vehemently oppose any practical support to the country, in his role as a senator.

    Your continuous catechisation on PB “do you disagree with… “ etc, becomes tedious.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,469
    viewcode said:

    theakes said:

    Polls, Polls, Polls, why are we such claves to them when at the end they are always that much out.
    The election is over really, the Republicans have it in the bag. We can but just hope they can restrain Trump again.

    • 2004: Kerry was certain to win. He lost
    • 2015: UKGE was certain to be a tie. It wasn't
    • 2017: Theresa May was certain to get a majority. She didn't
    It really isn't over until the last day.
    The polls did not say that Kerry was certain to win:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_presidential_election#Electoral_College_forecasts
  • MattWMattW Posts: 22,700
    Stuartinromford said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
    That highlights what a genius connan Trump is. (Even if you don't like what he does, you have to acknowledge that he does what he does very well.)

    Trump says a load of stuff. Most of it is lies, and that is accepted at the "we know that he knows that we know that most of it is lies" level.

    But here's the genius bit. Somehow, a lot of people assume that the stuff that Trump says that they don't like is lies (like selling Ukraine down the river) but the one thing they approve of is somehow to be trusted. But everyone believes a different bit.

    It's a brilliant trick if you can pull it off. Doubly so if you can keep doing it for eight years. Not even Boris managed that.
    What are these one things we might approve of that Trump has done?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    Credit to the NYT, though.
    They’ve finally printed a headline which doesn’t sane wash.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,874
    I’m not sure that Grover Cleveland is a good comparison. Grover Cleveland was one of the USA’s better presidents.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 663
    Nigelb said:

    Credit to the NYT, though.
    They’ve finally printed a headline which doesn’t sane wash.

    Just looks like desperation.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    edited October 27
    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,297
    Fairliered said:

    I’m not sure that Grover Cleveland is a good comparison. Grover Cleveland was one of the USA’s better presidents.

    I meant in the sense that Grover was the 22nd and 24th President, Trump if he wins will be the 45th and 47th President.
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,213
    WildernessPt2 said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    She is worse than every single predecessor who has won the nomination to be a presidential candidate, with the exception of the person she is standing against.
    And there's the problem. If the Dems continue to polling day with their only message being "Trump is an unstable fascist" or variants of, then they will lose. They need to find some sort of positive message too.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,720
    edited October 27
    I think he has it in the bag. It felt very different in 2020.

    The polls seem to be suggesting a pretty good day for down ballot Democrats though. That’s pretty important for US democracy and the preservation thereof against something like we saw yesterday in Georgia.

    They need a good showing in the House and Senate, and control of as many state governments as possible.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,134
    "Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) is set to fall short of a single-party majority after a close-run snap election, exit polls suggest.

    The LDP is projected to win from 153 to 219 lower house seats, broadcaster NHK said. The Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) is projected to win from 128 to 191 seats.

    A party needs 233 seats to control the house, known as the Diet, meaning the LDP will need to enter a coalition to stay in power."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8xpev42g78o
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    theakes said:

    Polls, Polls, Polls, why are we such claves to them when at the end they are always that much out.
    The election is over really, the Republicans have it in the bag. We can but just hope they can restrain Trump again.

    Have your ‘sources’ told you that …
    Or is it just an opinion ?
  • CharlieSharkCharlieShark Posts: 101
    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,720
    edited October 27
    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    WildernessPt2 said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    She is worse than every single predecessor who has won the nomination to be a presidential candidate, with the exception of the person she is standing against.
    And there's the problem. If the Dems continue to polling day with their only message being "Trump is an unstable fascist" or variants of, then they will lose. They need to find some sort of positive message too.
    Starmer just won a stonking majority with a message of “the Tories are shit”, so I’m not sure that simple advice necessarily applies when the opposing team is sufficiently bad.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 22,700
    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    WildernessPt2 said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    She is worse than every single predecessor who has won the nomination to be a presidential candidate, with the exception of the person she is standing against.
    And there's the problem. If the Dems continue to polling day with their only message being "Trump is an unstable fascist" or variants of, then they will lose. They need to find some sort of positive message too.
    Why do you think this is their only message?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    Meanwhile Vance denies Trump even says this kind of crap.

    Tapper: Trump said he going to use the military to go after 'the enemy within,' which is the American people

    Vance: He did not say that Jake! Show me the quote!

    Tapper: *reads a Trump quote from two days ago*
    https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1850535602661294525

    So I can see what william sees in him.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,055
    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Just googled it. Why wait until Monday morning?

    Good evening, everybody.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,871
    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,469
    Nigelb said:

    Meanwhile Vance denies Trump even says this kind of crap.

    Tapper: Trump said he going to use the military to go after 'the enemy within,' which is the American people

    Vance: He did not say that Jake! Show me the quote!

    Tapper: *reads a Trump quote from two days ago*
    https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1850535602661294525

    So I can see what william sees in him.

    Vance has to wait until after the election before saying that Trump is senile/mad.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    Stuartinromford said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
    That highlights what a genius connan Trump is. (Even if you don't like what he does, you have to acknowledge that he does what he does very well.)

    Trump says a load of stuff. Most of it is lies, and that is accepted at the "we know that he knows that we know that most of it is lies" level.

    But here's the genius bit. Somehow, a lot of people assume that the stuff that Trump says that they don't like is lies (like selling Ukraine down the river) but the one thing they approve of is somehow to be trusted. But everyone believes a different bit.

    It's a brilliant trick if you can pull it off. Doubly so if you can keep doing it for eight years. Not even Boris managed that.
    And also that his talking with no logic structure or discipline is celebrated as "authentic". It's like the more obviously unfit to be president he is the more the cult want him as president. The derangement isn't a bug, it's a feature.

    Thank god he's not going to win.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,853
    TimS said:

    I think he has it in the bag. It felt very different in 2020.

    The polls seem to be suggesting a pretty good day for down ballot Democrats though. That’s pretty important for US democracy and the preservation thereof against something like we saw yesterday in Georgia.

    They need a good showing in the House and Senate, and control of as many state governments as possible.

    Biden felt miles ahead at this point in 2020. But it doesn't mean Kamala has necessarily lost
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,134
    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    edited October 27
    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    I think he has it in the bag. It felt very different in 2020.

    The polls seem to be suggesting a pretty good day for down ballot Democrats though. That’s pretty important for US democracy and the preservation thereof against something like we saw yesterday in Georgia.

    They need a good showing in the House and Senate, and control of as many state governments as possible.

    Biden felt miles ahead at this point in 2020. But it doesn't mean Kamala has necessarily lost
    Biden felt miles behind in 2022.
    Vibes aren’t always a great guide to elections in a place as diverse as the US.

    Like Robert, I wouldn’t be surprised by either a Trump or a Harris win.
    I’ve greatly hedged my position in the last fortnight, but I’m still betting on a Harris win, though.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,054
    Here's a list of ten people I'd vote as leader of my country ahead of Donald Trump on his 2024 platform / state of mind:
    - Jeremy Corbyn
    - Liz Truss
    - Keir Starmer
    - Kemi Badenoch
    - Kamala Harris
    - George W Bush
    - Gordon Brown
    - Boris Johnson
    - Emanuele Macron
    - Marine Le Pen
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,720
    Useful thread on the Georgian elections.

    https://x.com/tinadolbaia/status/1850569873748857075?s=46

    Expect a brain drain to Europe and the US over the next few years as young graduates there give up hope. A very sad day.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    We discussed this on the last thread (in and amongst a lot of Leon’s digressions).
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,069
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Trump did try to overthrow the election via slates of fake electors, though.

    He did actually try to subvert democracy. Nothing else really matters, as I see it.
    How much of the American conversation has touched on the January 6 question?

    From several thousand miles away, it's clear that it's not as simple as that. But in the good timeline, it would be that simple, wouldn't it?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,469
    kinabalu said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
    That highlights what a genius connan Trump is. (Even if you don't like what he does, you have to acknowledge that he does what he does very well.)

    Trump says a load of stuff. Most of it is lies, and that is accepted at the "we know that he knows that we know that most of it is lies" level.

    But here's the genius bit. Somehow, a lot of people assume that the stuff that Trump says that they don't like is lies (like selling Ukraine down the river) but the one thing they approve of is somehow to be trusted. But everyone believes a different bit.

    It's a brilliant trick if you can pull it off. Doubly so if you can keep doing it for eight years. Not even Boris managed that.
    And also that his talking with no logic structure or discipline is celebrated as "authentic". It's like the more obviously unfit to be president he is the more the cult want him as president. The derangement isn't a bug, it's a feature.

    Thank god he's not going to win.
    If Harris does win then the Dems really have played the political game well.

    They dragged out the court cases so that Trump was damaged but not destroyed and thus got an opponent far easier to beat than for example Haley or DeSantis.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,069
    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    What's the legal threshold for a recall petition to be opened? If he doesn't meet that, presumably he skulks around for four years as a Tawdry Independent.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,851
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Trump did try to overthrow the election via slates of fake electors, though.

    He did actually try to subvert democracy. Nothing else really matters, as I see it.
    This is what I can't understand. In many countries of the world he would now be in jail.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,720
    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    Yes, he looks thuggish.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 663
    edited October 27
    another_richard said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
    That highlights what a genius connan Trump is. (Even if you don't like what he does, you have to acknowledge that he does what he does very well.)

    Trump says a load of stuff. Most of it is lies, and that is accepted at the "we know that he knows that we know that most of it is lies" level.

    But here's the genius bit. Somehow, a lot of people assume that the stuff that Trump says that they don't like is lies (like selling Ukraine down the river) but the one thing they approve of is somehow to be trusted. But everyone believes a different bit.

    It's a brilliant trick if you can pull it off. Doubly so if you can keep doing it for eight years. Not even Boris managed that.
    And also that his talking with no logic structure or discipline is celebrated as "authentic". It's like the more obviously unfit to be president he is the more the cult want him as president. The derangement isn't a bug, it's a feature.

    Thank god he's not going to win.
    If Harris does win then the Dems really have played the political game well.

    They dragged out the court cases so that Trump was damaged but not destroyed and thus got an opponent far easier to beat than for example Haley or DeSantis.
    You mean they did precisely what the header claims Trump would do if he won office?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,573
    Gallowgate said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    I mean you have literally no idea whether it has failed or not. We will find out in a few weeks.
    Nine days, not weeks.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,796
    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    What have been Trump, Vance and the GOP’s positions on sending aid to Ukraine?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,871
    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    Wait.

    You are saying that anything less than unlimited support is identical to no support at all?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    edited October 27
    .
    Stuartinromford said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
    That highlights what a genius connan Trump is. (Even if you don't like what he does, you have to acknowledge that he does what he does very well.)

    Trump says a load of stuff. Most of it is lies, and that is accepted at the "we know that he knows that we know that most of it is lies" level.

    But here's the genius bit. Somehow, a lot of people assume that the stuff that Trump says that they don't like is lies (like selling Ukraine down the river) but the one thing they approve of is somehow to be trusted. But everyone believes a different bit.

    It's a brilliant trick if you can pull it off. Doubly so if you can keep doing it for eight years. Not even Boris managed that.
    Americans think Trump will make a better president than Harris on the polling. They reckon he will be better at handling the economy and immigration. Yet they don't like his actual policies very much but do like Harris' (scroll to the end of this long article to see them ranked)

    https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/50794-the-economy-what-2024-voters-want-and-which-candidate-they-trust

    There's a lot of delusion amongst the American public. This isn't 2016 when people unhappy with the direction the country was taking might look to an energetic outsider to sort things out. They now know what he's like, or should do.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    Theuniondivvie said:

    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    What have been Trump, Vance and the GOP’s positions on sending aid to Ukraine?
    Under Trump the invasion wouldn't have happened.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 663
    Stuartinromford said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Trump did try to overthrow the election via slates of fake electors, though.

    He did actually try to subvert democracy. Nothing else really matters, as I see it.
    How much of the American conversation has touched on the January 6 question?

    From several thousand miles away, it's clear that it's not as simple as that. But in the good timeline, it would be that simple, wouldn't it?
    January the 6th is absurd to blame on Trump, outside of sore loser. The other stuff about trying to pressure electors etc. but the Jan 6th is preposterous, truly preposterous. He called on a a rally, claimed he had been cheated, and told the crowd the march peacefully.
    "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

    There is no getting away of his intent, which was a peaceful display of defiance.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,297
    Stuartinromford said:

    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    What's the legal threshold for a recall petition to be opened? If he doesn't meet that, presumably he skulks around for four years as a Tawdry Independent.
    A recall petition will take place if an MP is:

    convicted of an offence in the UK and receives a custodial sentence (including a suspended sentence) or is ordered to be detained, other than solely under mental health legislation

    suspended from the House of Commons for 10 sitting days or 14 calendar days

    convicted of providing false or misleading information for allowance claims under the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009.

    In the case of a conviction, the recall petition will only be opened if the conviction, sentence or order has not been overturned during the appeal period and when any appeals have been heard and dismissed.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    They did. And it's worse now.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    Wait.

    You are saying that anything less than unlimited support is identical to no support at all?
    No, I'm saying that rhetoric and reality are not the same thing and you have to judge outcomes, not intentions.

    Biden might be well intentioned and he might talk a good game, but the end result is that Ukraine has lost territory and had a lot of people killed. Trump might be malign and talk softly about Putin, but while he was president, Putin didn't think it wise to start any further invasions.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,796
    edited October 27
    williamglenn said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    What have been Trump, Vance and the GOP’s positions on sending aid to Ukraine?
    Under Trump the invasion wouldn't have happened.
    Though repeatedly willing to give your interpretation of Biden’s efforts to help Ukraine you seem strangely unable to even refer to the position of Trump & co. It’s not a great augury for Trump II if all he does is say it’s not his fault so he’s going to do diddly to fix it.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    WildernessPt2 said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    She is worse than every single predecessor who has won the nomination to be a presidential candidate, with the exception of the person she is standing against.
    And there's the problem. If the Dems continue to polling day with their only message being "Trump is an unstable fascist" or variants of, then they will lose. They need to find some sort of positive message too.
    The Dems have a plenty positive message. Trump has a deeply cynical negative one. If Trump wins it won't be due to a lack of positivity from the Dems.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,573
    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    That's the paradox of American politics. Extremist Trump is in many ways the moderate face of the Republican Party. Some fear Trump will win but soon be replaced by Vance and Project 2025. Others hope that they in turn are just a bizarre cult hiding the GOP's traditional aim of giving billions to billionaires.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,488
    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    Yes, he looks thuggish.
    At sentencing, judges do not care for people who continue to hit when their opponent is on the ground.

    Suspect he will go for the "I could have been the next Cox/Amess" but I doubt it will wash.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,509
    williamglenn said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    What have been Trump, Vance and the GOP’s positions on sending aid to Ukraine?
    Under Trump the invasion wouldn't have happened.
    Well there's no arguing with belief.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,419
    edited October 27
    The excuse of "I felt threatened" is going to be seriously tested....after you sucker punch them and then continue to beat them on the ground.

    I have been very sympathetic of politicians of all stripes who has been attacked by members of the public in the past, individuals who do that should have the book through at them. But the new CCTV footage looks extremely bad for the MP.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,573
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Fairliered said:

    I’m not sure that Grover Cleveland is a good comparison. Grover Cleveland was one of the USA’s better presidents.

    I meant in the sense that Grover was the 22nd and 24th President, Trump if he wins will be the 45th and 47th President.
    Like Ronaldo 9 and 7 (that's a soccerball joke).
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,723
    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Not for want of trying - Trump tried to overturn an election, tried to get a foreign government to smear his opponent in exchange for military aid, witheld contracts from businessmen deemed unsupportive. We could go on. But that's corrupt tinpot authoritarianism itself.

    There were, by and large, two saving graces. Firstly Trump was personally inept. Secondly, a significant amount of those around him were old school Republicans who sought to manage him. There are endless reports of Trump suggesting something crackers or dangerous only to have to be told it was impossible or illegal. SCOTUS has made the latter fairly moot now. And who's going to stand up and say "no we can't do that" to him?

    I mean a lot of the tinpot authoritarianism is coming from the mouths of Trump and his team. One hell of a gamble to go "nah, they don't actually mean what they say".
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,297
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The excuse of "I felt threatened" is going to be seriously tested....after you sucker punch them and then continue to beat them on the ground.

    He will need Steven Gerrard's barrister.

    It took a jury less than 90 minutes today to clear Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard of affray even though he admitted punching a man three times in a bar.

    Gerrard maintained that he had acted in self-defence during the brawl at the Lounge Inn in Southport last December, which was triggered by a row over control of music.

    Gerrard, 29, had wanted to pick the music in the bar, but Marcus McGee, who was in charge of the CD player, refused his request. The trial was told that although McGee, 34, did not throw any punches, the player believed he was about to be hit.

    Earlier in the evening, the England international and his friends had seemed to be in high spirits, singing and dancing as they celebrated a crushing victory over Newcastle United.

    Minutes after he had been rebuffed by McGee, the footballer approached him as he sat on a barstool. John Doran, Gerrard's friend, elbowed McGee in the face, making him reel backwards and forwards. Fearing that he was about to be attacked, Gerrard landed three uppercuts on his face.

    During the trial, he apologised for what had happened. Around 100 supporters gathered outside court today and cheered as Gerrard left the building.

    Gerrard said: "I would like to put this case behind me now and I am really looking forward to the season ahead and concentrating on football now."

    Judge Henry Globe, recorder of Liverpool, told Liverpool crown court after the verdict that the football player "could walk away with his reputation intact".

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jul/24/steven-gerrard-cleared-affray
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    ",,,she's organised, disciplined and has run one of the best campaigns in American history from a distinctly inauspicious start."
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,213
    FF43 said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    WildernessPt2 said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    She is worse than every single predecessor who has won the nomination to be a presidential candidate, with the exception of the person she is standing against.
    And there's the problem. If the Dems continue to polling day with their only message being "Trump is an unstable fascist" or variants of, then they will lose. They need to find some sort of positive message too.
    The Dems have a plenty positive message. Trump has a deeply cynical negative one. If Trump wins it won't be due to a lack of positivity from the Dems.
    Could you tell me what the positive message is please.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,419
    edited October 27
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The excuse of "I felt threatened" is going to be seriously tested....after you sucker punch them and then continue to beat them on the ground.

    He will need Steven Gerrard's barrister.

    It took a jury less than 90 minutes today to clear Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard of affray even though he admitted punching a man three times in a bar.

    Gerrard maintained that he had acted in self-defence during the brawl at the Lounge Inn in Southport last December, which was triggered by a row over control of music.

    Gerrard, 29, had wanted to pick the music in the bar, but Marcus McGee, who was in charge of the CD player, refused his request. The trial was told that although McGee, 34, did not throw any punches, the player believed he was about to be hit.

    Earlier in the evening, the England international and his friends had seemed to be in high spirits, singing and dancing as they celebrated a crushing victory over Newcastle United.

    Minutes after he had been rebuffed by McGee, the footballer approached him as he sat on a barstool. John Doran, Gerrard's friend, elbowed McGee in the face, making him reel backwards and forwards. Fearing that he was about to be attacked, Gerrard landed three uppercuts on his face.

    During the trial, he apologised for what had happened. Around 100 supporters gathered outside court today and cheered as Gerrard left the building.

    Gerrard said: "I would like to put this case behind me now and I am really looking forward to the season ahead and concentrating on football now."

    Judge Henry Globe, recorder of Liverpool, told Liverpool crown court after the verdict that the football player "could walk away with his reputation intact".

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jul/24/steven-gerrard-cleared-affray
    I am sure if the trial hadn't been held in Liverpool it might have taken a bit longer to make a decision.

    I think Stokes was very lucky in his trial, even more so Alex Hales. The initial part of that incident, there seem no debate that somebody tried to bottle him and he defended himself. What happened after he dealt with the first guy, hmmm, especially Alex Hales booting the bloke on the ground when he was clearly no threat as the 3rd person had his restrained.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,307
    MJW said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Not for want of trying - Trump tried to overturn an election, tried to get a foreign government to smear his opponent in exchange for military aid, witheld contracts from businessmen deemed unsupportive. We could go on. But that's corrupt tinpot authoritarianism itself.

    There were, by and large, two saving graces. Firstly Trump was personally inept. Secondly, a significant amount of those around him were old school Republicans who sought to manage him. There are endless reports of Trump suggesting something crackers or dangerous only to have to be told it was impossible or illegal. SCOTUS has made the latter fairly moot now. And who's going to stand up and say "no we can't do that" to him?

    I mean a lot of the tinpot authoritarianism is coming from the mouths of Trump and his team. One hell of a gamble to go "nah, they don't actually mean what they say".
    Invading Iraq, extraordinary renditions, etc. That's sensible old-school politics. Thankfully Dick Cheney is backing Harris so there's a chance we'll see more of that instead of anything crackers or dangerous.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 663
    edited October 27
    Eabhal said:

    WildernessPt2 said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Trump did try to overthrow the election via slates of fake electors, though.

    He did actually try to subvert democracy. Nothing else really matters, as I see it.
    How much of the American conversation has touched on the January 6 question?

    From several thousand miles away, it's clear that it's not as simple as that. But in the good timeline, it would be that simple, wouldn't it?
    January the 6th is absurd to blame on Trump, outside of sore loser. The other stuff about trying to pressure electors etc. but the Jan 6th is preposterous, truly preposterous. He called on a a rally, claimed he had been cheated, and told the crowd the march peacefully.
    "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

    There is no getting away of his intent, which was a peaceful display of defiance.
    Indeed, and his heroic defiance of the mob on the steps of the Capitol, where with soaring oratory he espoused the virtues of the US Constitution and of democracy itself, was perhaps the most inspiring moment in American history since Gettysburg.

    His selfless campaigning of behalf of the injured police officers, often unreported, shows his commitment to peace and the rule of law. Not since Carter have we seen such a successful post-Presidency.

    This has had a profound effect on the Right across the English-speaking world, with recent demonstrations in England noted for their peaceful nature and their perseverance through "two-tier" policing.
    I think the riots in the uk were more to do with a disturbing tendency for asylum seekers and their descendants to get a bit stabby with the natives, and the news of regular murders and attempted murders to become afterthoughts in the news cycle.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,209
    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    Yes, he looks thuggish.
    what set him off though, need both sides to be able to comment
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,462
    ….
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    another_richard said:

    kinabalu said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    FF43 said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    You hope so because you are one of Putin's useful idiots who doesn't want to see the bleeding obvious threat that Trump poses.
    The wish might be the father to the thought. But it doesn't mean the thought won't happen unfortunately.
    That highlights what a genius connan Trump is. (Even if you don't like what he does, you have to acknowledge that he does what he does very well.)

    Trump says a load of stuff. Most of it is lies, and that is accepted at the "we know that he knows that we know that most of it is lies" level.

    But here's the genius bit. Somehow, a lot of people assume that the stuff that Trump says that they don't like is lies (like selling Ukraine down the river) but the one thing they approve of is somehow to be trusted. But everyone believes a different bit.

    It's a brilliant trick if you can pull it off. Doubly so if you can keep doing it for eight years. Not even Boris managed that.
    And also that his talking with no logic structure or discipline is celebrated as "authentic". It's like the more obviously unfit to be president he is the more the cult want him as president. The derangement isn't a bug, it's a feature.

    Thank god he's not going to win.
    If Harris does win then the Dems really have played the political game well.

    They dragged out the court cases so that Trump was damaged but not destroyed and thus got an opponent far easier to beat than for example Haley or DeSantis.
    Trump was who dragged it out though.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    williamglenn said:

    MJW said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Not for want of trying - Trump tried to overturn an election, tried to get a foreign government to smear his opponent in exchange for military aid, witheld contracts from businessmen deemed unsupportive. We could go on. But that's corrupt tinpot authoritarianism itself.

    There were, by and large, two saving graces. Firstly Trump was personally inept. Secondly, a significant amount of those around him were old school Republicans who sought to manage him. There are endless reports of Trump suggesting something crackers or dangerous only to have to be told it was impossible or illegal. SCOTUS has made the latter fairly moot now. And who's going to stand up and say "no we can't do that" to him?

    I mean a lot of the tinpot authoritarianism is coming from the mouths of Trump and his team. One hell of a gamble to go "nah, they don't actually mean what they say".
    Invading Iraq, extraordinary renditions, etc. That's sensible old-school politics. Thankfully Dick Cheney is backing Harris so there's a chance we'll see more of that instead of anything crackers or dangerous.
    Trump didn't order the Bay of Pigs either. Don't forget that.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,423
    WildernessPt2 said:

    Eabhal said:

    WildernessPt2 said:

    Stuartinromford said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    MJW said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    He is both deeply weird and scary too if you don't want America to go down the route of tinpot, corrupt, authoritariansm.
    Did any of those things happen between 2016 and 2020? Not really.
    Trump did try to overthrow the election via slates of fake electors, though.

    He did actually try to subvert democracy. Nothing else really matters, as I see it.
    How much of the American conversation has touched on the January 6 question?

    From several thousand miles away, it's clear that it's not as simple as that. But in the good timeline, it would be that simple, wouldn't it?
    January the 6th is absurd to blame on Trump, outside of sore loser. The other stuff about trying to pressure electors etc. but the Jan 6th is preposterous, truly preposterous. He called on a a rally, claimed he had been cheated, and told the crowd the march peacefully.
    "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

    There is no getting away of his intent, which was a peaceful display of defiance.
    Indeed, and his heroic defiance of the mob on the steps of the Capitol, where with soaring oratory he espoused the virtues of the US Constitution and of democracy itself, was perhaps the most inspiring moment in American history since Gettysburg.

    His selfless campaigning of behalf of the injured police officers, often unreported, shows his commitment to peace and the rule of law. Not since Carter have we seen such a successful post-Presidency.

    This has had a profound effect on the Right across the English-speaking world, with recent demonstrations in England noted for their peaceful nature and their perseverance through "two-tier" policing.
    I think the riots in the uk were more to do with a disturbing tendency for asylum seekers and their descendants to get a bit stabby with the natives, and the news of regular murders and attempted murders to become afterthoughts in the news cycle.
    Riots?! These are political prisoners! Peaceful activists!
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,462
    A new pub is opening in my corner of suburban north London.

    It does not accept cash.
  • CharlieSharkCharlieShark Posts: 101
    malcolmg said:

    TimS said:

    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    Yes, he looks thuggish.
    what set him off though, need both sides to be able to comment
    Not sure there is much defence for hitting a man with his hands in his pockets who is looking the other way, then following it up with another couple of hits for good measure while he is on the ground defenceless. He is very lucky that he isn't looking at a murder charge.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,800
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The excuse of "I felt threatened" is going to be seriously tested....after you sucker punch them and then continue to beat them on the ground.

    I have been very sympathetic of politicians of all stripes who has been attacked by members of the public in the past, individuals who do that should have the book through at them. But the new CCTV footage looks extremely bad for the MP.

    Though again I doubt it's the full story. There's a lot of contrext missing to what happened immediately prior to the video. I do agree it seems odd for MIke Amesbury to have acted as he has but the Police will doubtless carry out an investigation and I suspect more will come out about the background to this in due time.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,214
    Pagan2 said:

    Here is an example of nhs waste for you. Two days now since I lost my ventolin inhaler and cant get a prescription.....fighting with national health 111 all I am asking for is give me an emergency prescription in case I have an attack....they keep insisting despite having been prescribed it for 40 odd years I have to goto a walk in centre I can't actually get to rather than just issuing the prescription to get me through...if I have an asthma attack tonight the nhs will have to raise an ambulance.....get me in ed....give me oxygen etc...its not like its a dangerous or addictive drug

    So an asthma attack will cost the a couple of thousand rather than just issuing the fucking prescription

    You can buy a ventilin inhaler online now, you just have to say you previously had a prescription.
    https://www.dailychemist.com/product/asthma-treatment-inhaler-safe/?landingPage&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Pmax_Asthma_All_Assets_Google_UK&gclid=CjwKCAjwyfe4BhAWEiwAkIL8sEK-qpjh9sCDgs_AqqS6fIaaFsxDLg5LrpF-2U0vGU1AVzhN7CkUgRoCv4cQAvD_BwE

    If your asthma is badly controlled though, good idea to get a review appointment
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Gallowgate said:

    williamglenn said:

    The tactic of calling him weird has failed so they're back to calling him scary. It will fail too.

    I mean you have literally no idea whether it has failed or not. We will find out in a few weeks.
    Nine days, not weeks.
    If we know for certain who had won this on 6th November I will be genuinely gobsmacked.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    rcs1000 said:

    williamglenn said:

    Nigelb said:

    GarethoftheVale2 said:

    It all seems a bit hysterical TBH.

    Here's a challenge for PBers. Complete the following sentence without mentioning Donald Trump.

    Kamela Harris will make a great President because...

    … she won’t sell Ukraine down the river, crash the world economy, or knobble the Biden administration’s programs to rebuild US infrastructure and manufacturing.

    For a start.

    (Btw, arguing it’s hysterical to quote Trump’s own words, and say we should take them seriously is… interesting.
    You’re aware of the etymology of ‘hysterical’ ?)
    Biden/Harris have sold Ukraine down the river and got a lot of people killed in the process. How can you defend their record?
    Biden has sent aid to Ukraine, while constrained by a hostile (Republican) House of Representatives.

    JD Vance said sending aid to Ukraine "undermines our national security by exhausting critical resources on a strategic quagmire".

    You don't see any kind of difference? You know between one person who has actually sent aid, and another who actively opposes it.
    This is a false binary. Biden has sent only limited aid and has actively opposed Ukraine and its allies taking any actions it deems to be escalatory.
    Wait.

    You are saying that anything less than unlimited support is identical to no support at all?
    No, I'm saying that rhetoric and reality are not the same thing and you have to judge outcomes, not intentions.

    Biden might be well intentioned and he might talk a good game, but the end result is that Ukraine has lost territory and had a lot of people killed. Trump might be malign and talk softly about Putin, but while he was president, Putin didn't think it wise to start any further invasions.
    If it's all about what happened or didn't happen in the world "on his watch" (lol implies he was on the ball) then he must answer for the pandemic, I'm afraid.
  • CharlieSharkCharlieShark Posts: 101
    kinabalu said:

    CharlieShark said:

    Good test of policing over Mike Amesbury. Has to be arrested on Monday morning. Can't believe he still hasn't been suspended by Labour. Truly shocking stuff. Stiff sentence has to follow.

    Not impressed. It was very Reformy looking behaviour.
    Are you able to list the number of MPs jailed by party since 2000? We can then run through what party seems to attract the most criminals.
Sign In or Register to comment.