Sat 12 and Sun 13 November 2016
Posted: Sat 12 Nov, 2016 8:13 am
Morning folks
Americans showing the Brits on this onehttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... rump-tower" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Anti-Trump protesters gear up for weekend demonstrations across the US
More than 10,000 have signed up for a Saturday march from New York’s Union Square to Trump Tower, as unrest continues following his victory
What he's forgotten is the bit about Britain voting to make itself irrelevant to the US. What was it - a "door to nowhere".Farage: Boris Johnson comments to blame for Trump snubbing UK
The Ukip leader said rude words from senior Tories may have caused Trump to wait before calling the UK
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... nubbing-uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I rather liked the way you wore your heart on your seethe.tinyclanger2 wrote:As a first step to counteracting the global hate fest - Farage, Banks, Trump, Wilders, Hopkins, Leavers (many), Trumpers (all) - I'm aiming to adopt a more -oil-on-water demeanour.
I have started with my signature here, but humbly request a degree of patience vis a vis actual demeanour.
Our new world. Defined by hate.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 13276.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Man shot during anti-Trump protest rally in Portland, Oregon
‘Prediction professor’ who called Trump’s big win also made another forecast: Trump will be impeached
He was one of the few professional prognosticators to call a Donald Trump win -- and now he has another prediction
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 12451.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"I'm going to make another prediction," he said. "This one is not based on a system, it's just my gut. They don't want Trump as president, because they can't control him. He's unpredictable. They'd love to have Pence -- an absolutely down the line, conservative, controllable Republican. And I'm quite certain Trump will give someone grounds for impeachment, either by doing something that endangers national security or because it helps his pocketbook."
EXCELLENT!AngryAsWell wrote:LEGOVerified account
@LEGO_Group
@StopFundingHate We have finished the agreement with The Daily Mail and are not planning any future promotional activity with the newspaper
Obama said that one of the things he wanted to dedicate his time to after the presidency was redistricting across the country.Willow904 wrote:The Democrats really need to find a way to turn this support into seats in the house.
Though we can now at least expect state legislatures to move towards the Dems in the next few years. That is something, and significant in rebuilding the party.adam wrote:Obama said that one of the things he wanted to dedicate his time to after the presidency was redistricting across the country.Willow904 wrote:The Democrats really need to find a way to turn this support into seats in the house.
I think I'm being straightforward and honest with all this crap and that I'm only the voice of doom because the world really is a shit-hole hell, but there is all but no chance of getting anywhere with this. The democrats can win a clear majority of the House vote in the country, and state by state, but will still lose the house significantly because of so many gerrymandered boundaries.
The national picture is in the hands of congress. The house is all but unwinnable, and the midterm senate elections come on the cycle of one of the Democrats best years in living memory - they have 25 of the 33 seats to defend and whilst it is, of course, a bit more complicated than that, most of those 25 are in states that just voted convincingly for Trump in the GE. I dare you to tell me that people who have just voted for him will see sense about him by then. The Republican's hold of the Senate is very likely to increase, possibly to filibuster-proof levels (60 senators), after 2018.
The real control is with the states, anyway. The Republicans hold 31 governorships and 33 state houses. The dems 15 governorships and 13 statehouses. Not a hope. The house, and the senate, and the governors, and the state houses, won't listen to Obama, or to anyone else moaning about how they cement their control on things.
Good for Legohttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 13361.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Lego ends advertising with Daily Mail after calls for companies to 'Stop Funding Hate'
Toy company responds to campaigners by saying it is "not planning any future promotional activity" with the right-wing paper
Regardless of the fact that it patently affects our right to live, trade and work wherever we want in a 28 country block with a market of 510 million.Theresa May could try to overturn Brexit court ruling by claiming Article 50 won't affect UK citizens' rights
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 12606.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Perhaps. Or perhaps those kinds of cycles are broken by this individualistic populism. People have elected a bigoted, boastful, bullying clown, who ran by telling the most ridiculous lies and then lied about lying, and now he's lying again whilst preparing for office, and I find it very difficult to believe that enough of the electorate care, or will ever care.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Though we can now at least expect state legislatures to move towards the Dems in the next few years. That is something, and significant in rebuilding the party.adam wrote:Obama said that one of the things he wanted to dedicate his time to after the presidency was redistricting across the country.Willow904 wrote:The Democrats really need to find a way to turn this support into seats in the house.
I think I'm being straightforward and honest with all this crap and that I'm only the voice of doom because the world really is a shit-hole hell, but there is all but no chance of getting anywhere with this. The democrats can win a clear majority of the House vote in the country, and state by state, but will still lose the house significantly because of so many gerrymandered boundaries.
The national picture is in the hands of congress. The house is all but unwinnable, and the midterm senate elections come on the cycle of one of the Democrats best years in living memory - they have 25 of the 33 seats to defend and whilst it is, of course, a bit more complicated than that, most of those 25 are in states that just voted convincingly for Trump in the GE. I dare you to tell me that people who have just voted for him will see sense about him by then. The Republican's hold of the Senate is very likely to increase, possibly to filibuster-proof levels (60 senators), after 2018.
The real control is with the states, anyway. The Republicans hold 31 governorships and 33 state houses. The dems 15 governorships and 13 statehouses. Not a hope. The house, and the senate, and the governors, and the state houses, won't listen to Obama, or to anyone else moaning about how they cement their control on things.
*ahem* Afternoon.citizenJA wrote:oh my god you guys
good-morning, everyone
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... s-faux-pas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The photograph of Mrs May clad in a sari plays well to her Exotic Marigold Hotel constituency but are we to assume that it is her preferred sightseeing attire or should we now expect to see other carefully chosen folkloric costumes on official visits?
The Vietnamese ao dai with its alluring thigh-high split springs to mind as something that might appeal to the PM. No doubt her Indian hosts would have been far too polite to point out how inappropriate it is to adopt fancy dress on a trade mission but perhaps, when he comes to woo a post-Brexit City of London, Mr Modi could emphasise the patronising absurdity of the photo-op by sporting a bowler hat and pinstripes, while no visit to the Tower of London could be complete without dressing up as a Beefeater.
Jullien Gaer
London
They could but they won't. Half of Bush's cabinet had hopeless conflicts of interests between their government roles and their private holdings but you will never convince enough people to care. Trump will go through the motions of divestment and chinese walls and then shout that pedants and losers are trying to steal the people's election from them.AngryAsWell wrote:Donald Trump's Conflicts of Interest Could Pose a Constitutional Problem
Ever heard of the emoluments clause?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... al-problem" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Yes - this is what I was trying to articulate the other day. Weird thing to worry about (Donald Trump retreating on his public intentions), I know, but his not doing all he said that he would do might cause as much, if not more, unrest than if he did do what he's tantalised his followers with. And are his followers the more ugly side to cross than are his opponents? No reason to capitulate to them, but something to think about and be prepared for. Raised and then dashed expectations can be dangerous things.adam wrote:
I suppose it's possible that an even bigger demagogue will come along to stand against him and try to lead a rising to do all of the things he's whipped up support for, and if they do that will start in the states - maybe we'll see his 'America First' phrase growing as a new Tea Party within the broader Republican movement.
Perfect!adam wrote:*ahem* Afternoon.citizenJA wrote:oh my god you guys
good-morning, everyone
citizenJA wrote:oh my god you guys
good-morning, everyone
"Emoluments Clause. No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or TrustAngryAsWell wrote:Donald Trump's Conflicts of Interest Could Pose a Constitutional Problem
Ever heard of the emoluments clause?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... al-problem" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Keep in mind as well that Congress will be too busy holding hearings into whatever corruption they decide they can pin on Obama from his last acts as president - pardons and so on - to care at all about ever even thinking about investigating their own side.citizenJA wrote:"Emoluments Clause. No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or TrustAngryAsWell wrote:Donald Trump's Conflicts of Interest Could Pose a Constitutional Problem
Ever heard of the emoluments clause?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... al-problem" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever,
from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
Did no one notice how unsuitable and lawfully unable to fulfil the duties of US President prior to letting him have space on a ballot?
citizenJA wrote:Less than 50% voter turnout in the US
Can someone confirm or dispute this, please?
I've had a sick headache for a couple of days.
Every time I regain consciousness there's a blissful time prior remembering current events.
I'm sincerely sorry, I meant well. You're quite right about virtual food. The limitations of virtual community vex me too.tinyclanger2 wrote:virtual food, while meant well, is cruel.
am fantasizing oatmeal cookies.
Comparisons have been made with the distinctly sheepish appearance of Gove and Johnson the morning after our referendum.yahyah wrote:Trump seemed a very different man in the video and pics of him at the White House.
Almost humble, certainly not pumped up or triumphal. A bit worried looking.
Maybe he's had his President-elect security briefing and it has scared the bejaysus out of him or he didn't actually want to win and the reality is dawning on him.
Get a grip!tinyclanger2 wrote:virtual food, while meant well, is cruel.
am fantasizing oatmeal cookies.
don't be sorrycitizenJA wrote:I'm sincerely sorry, I meant well. You're quite right about virtual food. The limitations of virtual community vex me too.tinyclanger2 wrote:virtual food, while meant well, is cruel.
am fantasizing oatmeal cookies.
Yeah - and they got over it pretty fast.AnatolyKasparov wrote:Comparisons have been made with the distinctly sheepish appearance of Gove and Johnson the morning after our referendum.yahyah wrote:Trump seemed a very different man in the video and pics of him at the White House.
Almost humble, certainly not pumped up or triumphal. A bit worried looking.
Maybe he's had his President-elect security briefing and it has scared the bejaysus out of him or he didn't actually want to win and the reality is dawning on him.
As for the Donald, I have no doubt that he very much wants to *be* President - its just all the (often tedious and detail heavy) actual work it involves that doesn't appeal