Options
If you want to bet on the 2028 election with Trump & Obama as the candidates then you can now
If you want to bet on the 2028 election with Trump & Obama as the candidates then you now can – politicalbetting.com
William Hill have this market up and the talk about Donald Trump running for a third time, many expect the Trump enabling majority on SCOTUS to somehow parse the constitution to say Trump would be eligible.
0
Comments
Probably also be less smelly.
Yes, it will mean he can't pass legislation but he won't care about that.
*I can see them winning Ohio, North Carolina, Kentucky even Texas if the stars align, but those four?
If they win Maine and hold Georgia, that's one.
Then the first three I've named are probably their softest targets. Kentucky is not a soft target.
Nebraska might just go to an independent but it seems unlikely.
The Republicans have had a really bad night if they lose the Senate.
America will have had a really bad night if they don't given the age of some of the saner Supreme Court justices.
After yesterday's revelation of treasonous behaviour, there's no way Obama can be on the ballot...
At some point it might not, but we're unlikely to reach that before the midterms, I think.
Note even Hungary looks as though it might dislodge Urban. If you don't overturn democracy completely, then its institutions have a way of biting back is public opinion is sufficiently united.
(See also Zelensky backing down in his attempt to emasculate the anti-corruption bodies.)
Will any intrepid reporter ask him whether he watched South park this week
(And hope his hearing does the rest!)
Melania has her nest well-feathered by all accounts, and reportedly used her leverage as "not first lady yet" who might walk away to get a better deal in place for divorce. But that would be dependent on not pulling the rug.
But who knows what the agreement says about post-divorce circumstances?
The Democrats have a number of “leaders” well past their sell by date. I think the next phase is the push to replace them from the… not necessarily the left… the active?
I'm not sure what the mechanisms are enforcing said power, though, or if it requires help from SCOTUS.
No, I am not joking.
There is a lesson here for those who want Parliament to be subservient to the law.
If that was so, and the SC here consisted of 12 Reform appointed judges? You couldn’t fire them. Can’t pack the court - the court would declare the extra judges illegitimate.
Half a century of that to look forward to, until they drop off their perches.
“Keep the coinage and the courts. Let the rabble have the rest.”
These would be local Councillors I think, but have there been any who moved across whilst still in successful positions with no indication of losing?
(TBF that last - given recent politics - be a statement of the near impossible except for a very few places, so almost a predetermined answer.)
It’s a silly comparison because you have to have a constitutional court if you have a higher law, otherwise it’s meaningless. We do not have higher law so don’t need any sort of special constitutional court - the law is what Parliament says it is and always has been since what, the Glorious Revolution?
Let's also assume he will continue to do what he wants via executive order and waved through by a supine supreme court.
I suspect Democratic opposition will start to look toothless.
... The interesting bit is when Republicans start to focus on life after Trump.
The concept you are talking about is “impounding”
Congress sets a budget for Federal agencies. It specifies in great detail where the money is to be spent.
The President/Executive branch actually run the agencies.
Impoundment, is the theory that the President can direct the agencies to spend *less* than their budget allocated for X.
The reason it is seen as insanely radical? The entire structure of American politics is about controlling the Money River and exactly where it flows. Every tiny creek and rivulet branching from the great river is written into the laws. In return, those getting the money donate back to Congress (both Houses).
This is why Federal contracts are layers of outsourcing. To spread the money, like butter, carefully, on the right bits of the bread.
This is probably the one thing that could unite Congress.
Missed this one. Lee Anderson ups the stakes - commenting publicly on a case which is sub judice at 3pm yesterday, admitting that he took 24 hours to consider before doing it.
Enough Is Enough.
I spoke with Nottinghamshire Police yesterday about this case. I was asked not to go public on this matter as it may affect the trial. Why would it affect the trial? Are our judges and juries incompetent? Or is there another reason I am being asked to remain quiet.
I've spent the last 24 hours mulling over this and cannot keep quiet.
The man charged with this vile offence is an asylum seeker who has been living in Ashfield.
I have been banging on about illegal migration since I was elected. At first I was told by other MPs that I was a racist, a bigot and I should shut up.
I will not shut up and do not care about the consequences.
This government is importing rapists, sexual predators, and other vile criminals into our country.
One moment they're attacking French police with weapons and using guns in Northern France, the next minute they're in luxury hotels on our country and then placed in housing amongst us all.
Note to Labour government and the previous government - this is all down to you. Women and young girls are being attacked in their own towns and villages whilst you do nothing.
Our police ferry in Antifa to protest against genuinely concerned residents who are peacefully protesting then have the nerve to tell us all to remain calm.
This country is going to the dogs - You are turning it into a third world s**t hole and we've had enough.
I do not want these illegal migrants in my constituency or in my country.
https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/police-name-man-charged-rape-10367927
https://x.com/LeeAndersonMP_/status/1948022561402429459
Sounds nice?
Wait till whoever follows Reform works out The Answer.
It’s not The Laws you need to control. It’s the interpretation.
ECHR? I’ll just get me some judges who will knit some new rights from the ECHR.
Say, the various rights in it form collective rights Of The People. So in a case involving the Right To Family Life, say, the Right of The People to be {insert blather} supersedes individual rights.
"Major clashes have erupted this morning at several points along the border between Cambodia and Thailand, with significant escalation being seen as both sides have begun to utilize multiple-launch rocket systems and armored vehicles, including tanks. Amidst the clashes, Cambodia has ordered all of its citizens to immediately depart from Thailand."
https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1948238788808831016
Remember: Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.
The US version of electoral democracy was shlonky (and the Dems weren't innocent) before all this kicked off.
As foreign visitors go, US presidents cause more trouble than boat loads of asylum seekers
On day one of his term in office.
Legislation is much trickier to undo.
“This country is going to the dogs”.
This sentiment feels like it’s becoming more widespread and more passionately felt than at any time I can personally remember. And it’s being felt by those at opposite ends of the spectrum and for different (and sometimes opposite) reasons.
It would be astonishing to me if 2029 is not another change election. Rise of Reform is well commented on. But I doubt it ends there. I think we have an anti 2019 election when the duopoly reigned supreme. How well does Baxter stand up in such circumstances?
https://www.twz.com/nuclear/container-vaults-being-built-to-deploy-american-nuclear-bombs-to-remote-locations
Not worrying, at all...
RefUK have no positive narratives, just as they have no credible policies. All they have is political marketing.
Political alliance aside, what on earth was Starmer in about at the select committee on Monday? Lots of spare housing for Asylum Seekers?! We are constantly being told there is a chronic housing shortage
A Labour MP I spoke to recently is in despair at the Prime Minister. ‘He’s insane’, he told me. ‘How can he say that? How can he honestly think there’s huge amounts of spare housing? It’s mad.’
Another MP was even more blunt. ‘I want to scream,’ they said.
The subject of their ire – or the latest subject – was Keir Starmer’s appearance at Monday’s Liaison Committee with Parliament’s Select Committee chairs. Asked where he was going to find the extra housing needed to support the rising tide of homeless and asylum seekers, Sir Keir breezily declared: ‘Oh, there is lots of housing and many local authorities that can be used, and we’re identifying where it can be used.’
When the non-plussed chairman Dame Meg Hillier pressed him on precisely where all this spare accommodation was located, he frantically backtracked. He would ‘write to her’ with the details, he said.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14933043/DAN-HODGES-extraordinary-comments-labour-mps-keir-starmer-gaffe.html
The three liberals and Roberts will never resign while Trump is President, the three Trump appointments are too young to resign.
So, baring unexpected death, the only possible changes are replacing Thomas and/or Alito with young MAGA supporters.
The result of the 2028 presidential election is likely to be far more influential on the future of SCOTUS.
The thought of messing fundamentally with the organically developed system of courts, parliament, government and crown in an attempt to rationalise it is sub optimal.
Certainly if they didn't then they'll spend their time arguing about whether they should with the resulting internal splits.
Or perhaps Starmer has been watching too many episodes of Turdtowns.
The "housing crisis" is, as I've always argued, multi-layered and far more than simply building more houses or flats. There are those who can never even aspire to get on the housing ladder and for those who find themselves homeless, the local council is often their only point of refuge.
Financial changes are basically putting private rental into the hands of a smaller number of landlords with larger portfolios and I'm afraid while many are reputable and keep their properties well maintained, there are some who don't and we have created a new generation of slum for the 21st century whether it's damp little basement flats or fifteen men squeezed into a three bedroom semi with additional garden accommodation.
With little or no property of their own to use, Councils in London in particular have to send their homeless outside the capital which creates a huge additional cost.
Yet at the same time new developments are sitting half empty because no one can afford to pay what the developers want or need to get from each dwelling - the only parts of these sites which are full are those on shared equity.
We have got this so badly wrong and in my view playing by the rules of the market is part of the problem. We need to put the immediate primacy of supply and demand to one side and ask whether it's in the long term benefit of society for children to live in inadequate, squalid accommodation.
Rather less so if you're just tinkering with an existing system.
The are more likely - certainly ought, anyway - to conduct Congressional investigations into his multifarious malfeasances.
I vividly remember how the Alliance were going to change everything in the 1980s with fatuous articles about David Owen's SDP were going to sweep south and west England on the basis of a few polls. Now, we have Reform sweeping the north and the east.
Indeed, it's a bit like the Danegeld in the 9th and 10th centuries - the north and east are Reform, the south and west everyone else. Yes. I know, most analogies don't stand up to inspection....
Lord Botham ‘appalled’ by Somerset pitch on which 35 wickets fell in five sessions
County bowlers have struggled to take wickets with the Kookaburra ball but that was certainly not a problem when Durham visited Taunton
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2025/07/23/lord-botham-appalled-somerset-pitch-durham-taunton/
- after the worst motor manufacturing figures since 1953 (excluding the pandemic), things ought to pick up in the second half with the reduction in US tariffs.
- Turkey looks about to place the first new Eurofighter order there's been in years.
How would you start? Do we hold certain truths to be self evident for example - which truths? Do we try to define what we're trying to create "a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity". That's always worked for me.
The Dems should have learned that from their previous congressional investigation into Trump or for that matter the GOP's congressional investigations into Biden.
And its not a myth that the Dems waged lawfare against Trump.
Where they went wrong was in waging it so incompetently - attempting to damage rather than destroy Trump.
The reality is not that the country "is going to the dogs" it is that Social Media has long since gone to the dogs. Too many politicians and commentators seem to actually be craving a summer of race riots and pogroms.
This from Alison Pearson is typical of people who have lost the plot:
https://bsky.app/profile/sundersays.bsky.social/post/3lumtg6smj22i
867 new homes to replace a car park and shopping arcade in Peckham.
Rejected by the council (and opposed by the local MP, Labour environment minister
@Miatsf ).
https://x.com/s8mb/status/1948276826822062511
- then it would greatly improve the situation between now and the next election.
There are a lot of possible marginal gains, and very few magic solutions. Government should concentrate on the former, with urgency.
Imagine we had a constitution that has the power of the US constitution and in it is written the right to family life. The current (bonkers imv) interpretation might well last forever whereas say a new gov't can make it clear to lower courts (And all our courts are lower than parliament) exactly what they intend to mean and don't mean.
I'd say strengths:
US : Immovable election cycles; Free speech
UK: Parliamentary sovereignty (Affirmed by Miller) & ability to truly change the law
Weaknesses:
US: Very long term power of the court - in theory the House should be the strongest branch of Gov't; in practice it is the weakest, the reverse for the court via Maddison - though they did give up a whole bunch of power vis a vis the president with Trump vs United States.
Inability to change anything substantial with the completely unobtainable 2/3, 2/3, 2/3 lock required to constitutionally amend the constitution. This was OK in times gone by but it's a real millstone with the hyperpolarisation they have now.
That does suggest that he wanted her to be present. Why? If his concern was simply to change as the woman he claims to be why did he need another woman to watch him? Or be present? And why did he want to be present while the nurse changed and washed?
No woman is obliged to undress in front of a man - or indeed, anyone at all, if they don't want to. Nor is any woman obliged to be present while someone else undresses. And certainly not in a work context. And yet that seems to be the underlying assumption of some - that when a man demands a woman must comply.
The claim that the nurse harassed him has been rejected in the disciplinary investigation.
As for the Darlington nurses case, the reason there has not been as much coverage is that the tribunal hearing has not started yet. The nurse in question - "Rose" - is a man who is trying to get his girlfriend pregnant, has taken no hormones or any other steps to become a "woman". He is an active heterosexual male who has, it is alleged, gone into the female nurses' changing area in his underpants and asked them when they were getting undressed. Any man doing that is a creep. At best.
There is separately a criminal case involving the father of the Darlington nurse for various alleged sex offences.
There is nothing lascivious about pointing out these facts - which come from the evidence of the doctor himself. Any woman knows exactly how awful it is to be put in the position that nurse was in at such a time - to be deprived of privacy and dignity. It is a great pity that more men - especially those who claim to be women - are so lacking in sympathy and understanding of what women need and want at such a time. It is even odder that the female A&E consultants were also so lacking in sympathy. But then it turns out that they did not have to share a changing room with Dr Upton. It was only the nurses. Class is never far away in Britain.
That's been needed since AW Wellard (and I Botham) !
(Why is Botham still in the House of Lords, having made precisely two speeches since 2020?)
That will result in the presence of GB News, and we'll get "Live with Lee at Home - today we make beans on toast".
Although you could say it was a nonsense plan that the ever smug, self-admiring Dems came up with.
Similar to the Dems using tens of millions of their own money to boost MAGA candidates in GOP primary elections.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/oct/03/the-democrats-are-purposely-boosting-far-right-republicans-this-will-backfire
Thank you for spelling it out so clearly CF (despite the abuse you probably risk for doing so).
Incidentally I have not encountered different changing rooms for different grades of staff in any of the hospitals that I have worked in. I change in the same room as the HCA's. One hospital that I used to go to had a single unisex changing room, but not some "woke" innovation, it had simply always been like that since built in 1920. We had a screen between male and female sides.
LAW 1 THE PLAYERS
1.1 Number of players
A match is played between two sides, each of eleven players, one of whom shall be captain.
A bit of cricket nerdery following Pants injury. In 1986, England wicket keeper Bruce French was injured batting vs New Zealand and was replaced behind the stumps by retired 45 year old ex england keeper Bob Taylor who was in the crowd watching. The Hampshire keeper Bob Parks then took over from him for the remainder of the match, never otherwise being called up for England
I watched on telly (might have been highlights, cant recall) and remember Taylor being not too shabby for an OAP
Mind you the use of the Kookaburra ball is also a shit show. This is England FFS.