Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Someone is trying to persuade me that Trump is ill and might n

SystemSystem Posts: 8,258
edited June 29 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Someone is trying to persuade me that Trump is ill and might not stand in November

Yesterday I received an email from someone I have never been in contact with before or have any familiarity with which suggested that something might be happening in American politics less than 5 months before the presidential election. This is what it said:

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • Could this be a bettors ramp?

    Think all this talk of replacing Trumpsky is BS. Might try to do it AFTER Election Day, but doubt even Bobblehead (aka Mike Pence) is dumb enough to give him a pardon - look how great THAT worked out for Jerry Ford.

    Sound like wishful thinking by GOP hacks trying to avoid the tidal wave bearing down upon them: the slaughter of the guilty & dipshits.

    As for his health, my faith tells me God(ess) will wait until AFTER Election Day before shoving his troubled soul down the Trump Tower garbage shute and straight to the basement incinerator - should hold a raffle to see who gets to light the match . . .
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083
    > I still think irrespective of this, that there is a question mark over both Joe Biden and Donald Trump. So I have had a bet at about 10 to 1 laying Biden Trump being the nominee choice for the election.

    You have to watch the wording is these because it's now less than 2 months to the conventions, but more than 4 months to the election, and they're both more likely to take risks with their health as the election approaches. Assuming they'll both want to run if they're still breathing, that makes them both more likely to drop out after their formal nomination than before.
  • > I still think irrespective of this, that there is a question mark over both Joe Biden and Donald Trump. So I have had a bet at about 10 to 1 laying Biden Trump being the nominee choice for the election.

    You have to watch the wording is these because it's now less than 2 months to the conventions, but more than 4 months to the election, and they're both more likely to take risks with their health as the election approaches. Assuming they'll both want to run if they're still breathing, that makes them both more likely to drop out after their formal nomination than before.

    Four months is indeed a long time in politics, and political fortunes can change. Just ask Lincoln's ghost! In June 1864 he looked like a goner . . . but then Gen Sherman won the Battle of Atlanta in July, and that key victory boosted old Abe to victory.

    Sadly for Trumpsky (but not humanity) doesn't appear to be any Atlanta out there this year. Though it IS possible that he MIGHT lose Georgia while whistling Dixie.
  • When your incumbent Republican president, and Facebook, CrossFit, NASCAR, NFL, NCAA, Quaker Oats, WalMart, etc, etc go out of there way to publicly side with BLM thus disassociating themselves from Trumpsky, then you KNOW that he's in a DEEEEEEEEEP pile of his own you-know-what.
  • As for Biden, think he's going to conduct what is essential an old-fashioned (circa McKinley 1896) front-porch (or his case rumpus room) campaign. That is, NOT a lot of public rallies and flesh-pressing, which likely will NOT be an option unless you are a sociopath like our current Fearless Leader.

    Which will tend to keep Joe physically six-plus feet away from everyone except Jill. And aside from his tendency to misspeak, etc, well he's been doing that since he was sworn in as US Senator at the age of 30.

    Re: Bobblehead, only thing he's got going for him, is he's not quite as reprehensible or ignorant as his boss, but that is a VERY low bar. Kine of like having a pile of goat droppings next to a steaming pigpoop. In final analysis, they're BOTH a pile of shit.

    This ain't like 1924, when Calvin Coolidge gave GOP a 2nd term in office after the demise of Warren Harding and the Teapot Dome scandal. Semi-Maked Mike ain't this millenium's answer to Silent Cal. Mainly because in 1924 the US was NOT gripped by pandemic & recession.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,378
    Ummm... if I had a position on Pence being the nominee and I wanted to get out with a small profit, I'd probably email OGH anonymous tip, and get out while the going is good...

    All that being said:

    - Trump doesn't like losing
    - Trump might need to be pardoned, which requires his successor is someone extremely loyal

    And he might well be ill. Certainly some of the recent videos, of him struggling to raise a glass to his mouth, of him needing help walking, etc., are suggesting of health problems.

    One in ten for not being nominee... seems a little skinny, mind.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 6,036
    "How out of touch is the Tory party?

    To retain his majority, Boris Johnson is going to have to wage that 'war on woke'
    BY TIM BALE"

    https://unherd.com/2020/06/how-out-of-touch-is-the-tory-party/
  • "- Trump might need to be pardoned, which requires his successor is someone extremely loyal"

    Whatever happens this November, Pence will be VP until noon on January 20, 2021. Most likely DT resignation scenario would be AFTER he loses on November 3, 2020. IF yours truly was Bobblehead, reckon I'd be sorely tempted to PROMISE to pardon, then after Trumpsky forsakes office . . . then forget about it.

    That way, they'd BOTH go down in history . . . and The Donald goes down the river to Club Fed . . . or maybe up the river to Sing Sing.

    Would be poetic justice for a serial, congenital liar & betrayer. However, doubt that any resignation is in the cards.
  • RandomUserRandomUser Posts: 4
    PredictIt is full of pumpers and scammers like this so I would really only take it seriously if it were someone you actually know and trust would have information like this.

    Anyone remember all of those rumours supposedly hot in Westminster that Corbyn would be stepping down due to ill-health? Turned out to be a bunch of wishful thinking by MPs and staffers who wanted him gone.

    Yes, age is a risk but I would prefer calculating the actuarial risk.

    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.
  • "How out of touch is the Tory party?"

    The good book says that a dog licks it's own vomit. The Book of Bannon tells "Piccaninny" Johnson to start gobbling a dirty dog's recycled dinner.

    Since PM & co are have taken such an interest in public statuary, perhaps they could buy & ship over some surplus ones from US cut-rate. Maybe give Lord Nelson a rest and replace him with Robert E. Lee?

    After all Marse Robert was MIGHTY popular with the ruling class in jolly old England in early 1860s.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083

    PredictIt is full of pumpers and scammers like this

    Speaking of which, did the emailer of the anonymous tip-off by any chance self-identify as a cat? If so did they mention that their fur is very soft?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460
    Re the email in the header -- it reads like a clumsy attempt to move Betfair markets. If it were genuine information, it would make more sense to give it to a newspaper. It ends: But to judge by what I’m hearing the circle is being kept exceptionally tight. As in, tight apart from this correspondent's acquaintance, who in turn heard it from a source in the military. Colour me unconvinced.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,757
    He's still tweeting....



    Although what the NYT Books review has done to deserve his ire....
  • Kevin_McCandlessKevin_McCandless Posts: 246
    edited June 29
    The first press conference with President Pence and Vice-President Pelosi? The federal government could wipe out its deficit by charging folks to watch it.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 896
    I doubt that Trump will run for President if he suspects that he will lose. Given that this seems ever more likely, calling in the doctors could be a face saving gesture that may also provide some legal cover further down the road.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460
    Gadfly said:

    I doubt that Trump will run for President if he suspects that he will lose. Given that this seems ever more likely, calling in the doctors could be a face saving gesture that may also provide some legal cover further down the road.

    Throwing a sickie could also provide a reason for voters to question the wisdom of electing a man even older than Trump. Like, say, Joe Biden.
  • RandomUserRandomUser Posts: 4
    It does seem like GOP operatives want him to drop out - Fox News is reporting so - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-polls-republican-gop-operatives-possible-drop-out

    I'm sceptical because Corbyn never did despite that but Trump does look defeated recently; I think he knows he is going to lose because the other day he Freudian slipped, saying that Biden was going to be president. Trump is more in it for himself compared to an ideologue like Corbyn who wanted the hard left to control the party so if he thinks he can't win he may throw it in.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619
    There must be a lot of doubters in both parties about the candidates chosen, as with 2016 it’s likely to be a winning move to go with someone who doesn’t appear to be losing their marbles on television. The question is, can they engineer it before the conventions, before the election or before the inauguration?

    Biden’s 1.04 to be nominated, and Trump is as long as 1.12 to be nominated. I think I should be laying both, for small stakes. If a week is a long time in politics, the next four months are going to be very long indeed. The campaigns are going to be very personal and very negative.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460
    Sandpit said:

    There must be a lot of doubters in both parties about the candidates chosen, as with 2016 it’s likely to be a winning move to go with someone who doesn’t appear to be losing their marbles on television. The question is, can they engineer it before the conventions, before the election or before the inauguration?

    Biden’s 1.04 to be nominated, and Trump is as long as 1.12 to be nominated. I think I should be laying both, for small stakes. If a week is a long time in politics, the next four months are going to be very long indeed. The campaigns are going to be very personal and very negative.

    The conventions are in August; there are just seven weeks until the DNC and eight to the RNC. With all these markets, it is important to check what you are actually betting on (or against). For instance, is the next president the one who wins in November, or the one inaugurated in January, or even, given today's header, Mike Pence if Trump does resign in the next few weeks? Nor should it be assumed that different bookmakers will pay out on the same criterion. I'd have thought 1.12 against Trump in eight weeks' time is not bad value.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083

    It does seem like GOP operatives want him to drop out - Fox News is reporting so - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-polls-republican-gop-operatives-possible-drop-out

    This is a repeated storyline from when Trump was running behind Hillary in 2016, and Trump now has more control of the party, nearly all the delegates and he's a sitting president. I think it's going to be impossible to shift him unless he decides to go of his own accord; This is another reason why I think if he goes it's to be replaced by someone within the family who he will trust when they advise him to go.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460

    Sandpit said:

    There must be a lot of doubters in both parties about the candidates chosen, as with 2016 it’s likely to be a winning move to go with someone who doesn’t appear to be losing their marbles on television. The question is, can they engineer it before the conventions, before the election or before the inauguration?

    Biden’s 1.04 to be nominated, and Trump is as long as 1.12 to be nominated. I think I should be laying both, for small stakes. If a week is a long time in politics, the next four months are going to be very long indeed. The campaigns are going to be very personal and very negative.

    The conventions are in August; there are just seven weeks until the DNC and eight to the RNC. With all these markets, it is important to check what you are actually betting on (or against). For instance, is the next president the one who wins in November, or the one inaugurated in January, or even, given today's header, Mike Pence if Trump does resign in the next few weeks? Nor should it be assumed that different bookmakers will pay out on the same criterion. I'd have thought 1.12 against Trump in eight weeks' time is not bad value.
    Not that I shall be betting on Trump. If I want to back 1.12 shots, I can find plenty of them in a day's racing, tying up money for a few seconds rather than a couple of months.

    Biden is 1.04 against, which is about the same as a clear leader in a horserace approaching the final hurdle. Of course, if Biden does drop out before the convention, that might well change the VP nominee market!
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,333

    Re the email in the header -- it reads like a clumsy attempt to move Betfair markets. If it were genuine information, it would make more sense to give it to a newspaper. It ends: But to judge by what I’m hearing the circle is being kept exceptionally tight. As in, tight apart from this correspondent's acquaintance, who in turn heard it from a source in the military. Colour me unconvinced.

    Agreed.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083
    edited June 29


    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.

    The benefit of electing a 77-year-old is that they don't have to worry so much about their lives after they leave office...

    Also the crimes in question are the domestic *obstruction* cases, not the original attempted deal with Ukraine.

    I don't know whether it would happen or not but if I was Trump, it's certainly something I'd be worried about.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,333


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619

    Sandpit said:

    There must be a lot of doubters in both parties about the candidates chosen, as with 2016 it’s likely to be a winning move to go with someone who doesn’t appear to be losing their marbles on television. The question is, can they engineer it before the conventions, before the election or before the inauguration?

    Biden’s 1.04 to be nominated, and Trump is as long as 1.12 to be nominated. I think I should be laying both, for small stakes. If a week is a long time in politics, the next four months are going to be very long indeed. The campaigns are going to be very personal and very negative.

    The conventions are in August; there are just seven weeks until the DNC and eight to the RNC. With all these markets, it is important to check what you are actually betting on (or against). For instance, is the next president the one who wins in November, or the one inaugurated in January, or even, given today's header, Mike Pence if Trump does resign in the next few weeks? Nor should it be assumed that different bookmakers will pay out on the same criterion. I'd have thought 1.12 against Trump in eight weeks' time is not bad value.
    Yes, there’s some careful reading of market rules and payout dates required for the US markets. Betfair’s nomination market pays out at the conventions for example, and the confusingly named Next President market pays out on Inauguration Day 2021, even if the incumbent is re-elected - in contrast with their Next UK PM market, which runs through elections and might be open for a decade or more. The election result isn’t finally confirmed until the electoral college meets, which is several weeks after the election itself, some states (waves at California) take weeks to finalise the result, even if they vote overwhelmingly one way. We could end up in court of course, as last happened in 2000, delaying the result still further. It’s a minefield, especially when one considers the context of two old and possibly sick men running. The person nominated may not be the person on the ballot papers, the person elected might not be inaugurated etc.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,333
    A supposed health care professional...

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460
    Nigelb said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
    I'm suggesting the new President's Justice Department might find more productive uses of its time and energy. When the chips are down, I would expect a pardon, but mainly I expect the chips to stay up. (A lazy pedant wonders if unplayed chips are properly described as up. Any casino-goers on pb?)
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 2,958
    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619
    edited June 29

    Nigelb said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
    I'm suggesting the new President's Justice Department might find more productive uses of its time and energy. When the chips are down, I would expect a pardon, but mainly I expect the chips to stay up. (A lazy pedant wonders if unplayed chips are properly described as up. Any casino-goers on pb?)
    Chips not in play are in your hand or your stack, surely?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 3,460
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
    I'm suggesting the new President's Justice Department might find more productive uses of its time and energy. When the chips are down, I would expect a pardon, but mainly I expect the chips to stay up. (A lazy pedant wonders if unplayed chips are properly described as up. Any casino-goers on pb?)
    Chips not in play are in your hand, surely?
    Chips not in play are probably in a pile on the table in front of you; at least, that is my understanding from watching James Bond play poker and roulette.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,333

    Nigelb said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
    I'm suggesting the new President's Justice Department might find more productive uses of its time and energy. When the chips are down, I would expect a pardon, but mainly I expect the chips to stay up. (A lazy pedant wonders if unplayed chips are properly described as up. Any casino-goers on pb?)
    Yes, but SDNY is a federal district with its own attorney general. The recent brouhaha was all about the a Justice Department wrongly interfering there for political reasons.
    And there is, of course, also the prospect of cases brought by state prosecutors, over which the Justice Department has no jurisdiction at all.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 2,958

    As for Biden, think he's going to conduct what is essential an old-fashioned (circa McKinley 1896) front-porch (or his case rumpus room) campaign. That is, NOT a lot of public rallies and flesh-pressing, which likely will NOT be an option unless you are a sociopath like our current Fearless Leader.

    Which will tend to keep Joe physically six-plus feet away from everyone except Jill. And aside from his tendency to misspeak, etc, well he's been doing that since he was sworn in as US Senator at the age of 30.

    Re: Bobblehead, only thing he's got going for him, is he's not quite as reprehensible or ignorant as his boss, but that is a VERY low bar. Kine of like having a pile of goat droppings next to a steaming pigpoop. In final analysis, they're BOTH a pile of shit.

    This ain't like 1924, when Calvin Coolidge gave GOP a 2nd term in office after the demise of Warren Harding and the Teapot Dome scandal. Semi-Maked Mike ain't this millenium's answer to Silent Cal. Mainly because in 1924 the US was NOT gripped by pandemic & recession.

    Is this a recession we’re headed for, or a deep recession, or a depression? I think depression is the most accurate term.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Interesting to contrast differing approaches to masks, when the evidence is that they’re something that works if everyone does it, so long as there’s sufficient supply. Public attitudes seem to follow along the authoritarian/libertarian axis.

    Here in the UAE, masks are compulsory to wear in public, even outside and in cars, with large fines (£600) for non-compliance. Supermarkets also make you wear gloves, shops and malls have temperature scanners at entrances.

    As expected, and at the other extreme, it’s almost impossible to persuade Americans to do anything, with large groups arguing against them as a point of principle, but most other countries are somewhere in the middle.
  • Nigelb said:

    A supposed health care professional...

    "What most people don't remember about the Republic of South Vietnam was that it lasted for nearly two decades. And during that time, it was a model of stability and democracy for nations throughout the region...."
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 2,971

    Re the email in the header -- it reads like a clumsy attempt to move Betfair markets. If it were genuine information, it would make more sense to give it to a newspaper. It ends: But to judge by what I’m hearing the circle is being kept exceptionally tight. As in, tight apart from this correspondent's acquaintance, who in turn heard it from a source in the military. Colour me unconvinced.

    Exactly. That email bears several classic hallmarks of a conspiracy theory/scam email. Another is "I’m passing on to you what a colleague has learnt from a source in the military."

    If you are prepared to use this as betting advice then I nkow a Prinse in Nogeria with a milion dollar to hide
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 3,099

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Jeez. I'm not repeating Phil's erroneous message which should be banned for spreading false virus info.

    Face masks are clearly helpful for preventing the spread of this respiratory borne illness, both for those who have the virus and those who don't wish to catch it.

    There will always be nay'sayers. There are some who think the moon landings never happened and that if you sail out beyond California you fall off the edge of the earth.

    Spreading such nonsense in this case kills people.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 2,971
    So Jane's not Tame has also read the email sent to OGH.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 2,080
    Never heard Mr Smithson use the word "hate" before to describe someone in the political sphere.. at least not that I can recall....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619
    Bars ordered shut in California, Texas and Florida, following spike in cases after recently re-opening.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8468601/Governor-Newsom-closes-bars-LA-six-California-counties.html

    USA really struggling to get people to behave, as predicted months ago. Same with India and Brazil, where high population density and poor sanitation combine to make huge infection numbers sadly inevitable.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,598
    Good morning, everyone.

    I laid Trump for the nomination at 1.07 on Betfair. There's backing now at 1.11, so I'm wondering about hedging to go green or evens if it's him. The agony of choice.

    Not sure it'll get much longer (unless he actually drops out/is axed).
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 2,971
    Sandpit said:

    Bars ordered shut in California, Texas and Florida, following spike in cases after recently re-opening.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8468601/Governor-Newsom-closes-bars-LA-six-California-counties.html

    USA really struggling to get people to behave, as predicted months ago. Same with India and Brazil, where high population density and poor sanitation combine to make huge infection numbers sadly inevitable.

    HYUFD disagrees with you. At least in India, because they do not have enough old people.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 28,030

    He's still tweeting....



    Although what the NYT Books review has done to deserve his ire....
    Biden described this as a “betrayal”

    Unless there’s something I’m missing, isn’t it just Russia being shitty again?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 6,036
    Paul Simon. Hearts and Bones.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,177
    Surprised at such a vague email getting a thread header. I'd certainly take with a pinch of salt.

    But I certainly agree with OGH that I despise (I'd use that word rather than hate) Trump so much that it's hard to be objective.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 35,177
    edited June 29
    Charles said:

    He's still tweeting....



    Although what the NYT Books review has done to deserve his ire....
    Biden described this as a “betrayal”

    Unless there’s something I’m missing, isn’t it just Russia being shitty again?
    It's a betrayal if POTUS knew about this and was still friendly with Putin.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 28,030

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
    I'm suggesting the new President's Justice Department might find more productive uses of its time and energy. When the chips are down, I would expect a pardon, but mainly I expect the chips to stay up. (A lazy pedant wonders if unplayed chips are properly described as up. Any casino-goers on pb?)
    Chips not in play are in your hand, surely?
    Chips not in play are probably in a pile on the table in front of you; at least, that is my understanding from watching James Bond play poker and roulette.
    Isn’t it the difference between being in your hand (up) and on the baize (down)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,378


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    https://watergate.info/1974/09/08/text-of-ford-pardon-proclamation.html

    a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in

    That's a... ummm.... pretty broad pardon.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 3,599

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 28,030

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Jeez. I'm not repeating Phil's erroneous message which should be banned for spreading false virus info.

    Face masks are clearly helpful for preventing the spread of this respiratory borne illness, both for those who have the virus and those who don't wish to catch it.

    There will always be nay'sayers. There are some who think the moon landings never happened and that if you sail out beyond California you fall off the edge of the earth.

    Spreading such nonsense in this case kills people.
    Isn’t that what Phil is saying?

    Wearing a mask protects other people not you. If everyone wears a mask everyone is safer
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,378


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 28,030

    Charles said:

    He's still tweeting....



    Although what the NYT Books review has done to deserve his ire....
    Biden described this as a “betrayal”

    Unless there’s something I’m missing, isn’t it just Russia being shitty again?
    It's a betrayal if POTUS knew about this and was still friendly with Putin.
    Not necessarily, although that would make it an explicable political jab
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,378
    edited June 29
    Andy_JS said:

    Paul Simon. Hearts and Bones.

    A much underrated album: I sung The Late Great Johnny Ace to my children at 3am when I was changing nappies :lol:

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083
    edited June 29
    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 31,378

    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
    And if he doesn't, then Pence is unlikely to want to help out with a pardon in the Nov-Jan period, what with him having been knifed in the back by Trump.

    Which is why I think Pence remains the likeliest successor. He's been incredibly loyal, and Trump values loyalty.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,675
    If they really were using library photos to cover Trump’s absence, surely there would be an amateur sleuth in the US on the case, spotting differences in hairstyle, suntan, weather, angle of the sun, etc.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 18,829
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
    And if he doesn't, then Pence is unlikely to want to help out with a pardon in the Nov-Jan period, what with him having been knifed in the back by Trump.

    Which is why I think Pence remains the likeliest successor. He's been incredibly loyal, and Trump values loyalty.
    Hmm. Trump values loyalty by others to him. Don't think it works so well the other way round.

    And Good Morning to all.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619

    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
    Does he do something really silly, like resign a week before the inauguration in favour of Pence, whose only task in office is to write the pardon before he is himself replaced by Biden on 20th Jan?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,649
    I can see Trump preferring to resign undefeated than to lose the election. It will certainly be a shame for him and his politics not to be sent packing.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 2,080
    Jonathan said:

    I can see Trump preferring to resign undefeated than to lose the election. It will certainly be a shame for him and his politics not to be sent packing.

    Quite.. and so.marvellous to see Corbyn sent packing...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,675
    Latest Lincoln Project anti-Trump Ad. WW2 themed and written by one of the Band of a Brothers writing team. Not sure it hits such a powerful political spot, though.

    https://us.cnn.com/2020/06/28/politics/lincoln-project-trump-coronavirus-deaths-greatest-generation/index.html
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083
    edited June 29
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
    Does he do something really silly, like resign a week before the inauguration in favour of Pence, whose only task in office is to write the pardon before he is himself replaced by Biden on 20th Jan?
    Speaking as someone with a bet on him making it all the way to the end of his term that's worth much more I intended due to cybercoin fluctuations, I can totally fucking imagine him doing that.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,649

    Jonathan said:

    I can see Trump preferring to resign undefeated than to lose the election. It will certainly be a shame for him and his politics not to be sent packing.

    Quite.. and so.marvellous to see Corbyn sent packing...
    And yet you validated Boris with his deliberately divisive, unlawful, corrupt and dangerously incompetent politics.
  • eekeek Posts: 8,141
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
    Does he do something really silly, like resign a week before the inauguration in favour of Pence, whose only task in office is to write the pardon before he is himself replaced by Biden on 20th Jan?
    No but I think you demonstrate that if Trump cares about anything it's himself and he doesn't trust anyone.

    So if Trump wants a pardon, he's going to want a backup plan. Which to me would be Pence becomes President but Trump will keep control of the nomination until the pardon has been delivered.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,453
    So another Johnson recovery announcement, £1 billion on schools over ten years (£100m/ year) not really a lot, any idea of the UK annual schools capital budget? and yet again who’s going to build the new schools.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 22,333
    Charles said:

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Jeez. I'm not repeating Phil's erroneous message which should be banned for spreading false virus info.

    Face masks are clearly helpful for preventing the spread of this respiratory borne illness, both for those who have the virus and those who don't wish to catch it.

    There will always be nay'sayers. There are some who think the moon landings never happened and that if you sail out beyond California you fall off the edge of the earth.

    Spreading such nonsense in this case kills people.
    Isn’t that what Phil is saying?

    Wearing a mask protects other people not you. If everyone wears a mask everyone is safer
    Except that masks do protect the wearer. Your last sentence is correct.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 26,619

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    Trump can't hand over the Presidency to anyone other than Pence. He can hand the nomination to Barr or a member of the family, but that doesn't necessarily get him pardoned.
    Right, so I'm thinking he'd want to hang onto the presidency for as long as possible (ie until next January) then pass it on his favoured successor.

    Obviously the second part of that, and thus the pardon part, depends on the favoured successor winning the election...
    Does he do something really silly, like resign a week before the inauguration in favour of Pence, whose only task in office is to write the pardon before he is himself replaced by Biden on 20th Jan?
    Speaking as someone with a bet on him making it all the way to the end of his term that's worth much more I intended due to cybercoin fluctuations, I can totally fucking imagine him doing that.
    LOL, make sure he doesn’t find out about your bet!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 3,599
    nichomar said:

    So another Johnson recovery announcement, £1 billion on schools over ten years (£100m/ year) not really a lot, any idea of the UK annual schools capital budget? and yet again who’s going to build the new schools.

  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 2,316
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    I can see Trump preferring to resign undefeated than to lose the election. It will certainly be a shame for him and his politics not to be sent packing.

    Quite.. and so.marvellous to see Corbyn sent packing...
    And yet you validated Boris with his deliberately divisive, unlawful, corrupt and dangerously incompetent politics.
    That’s how bad Corbyn was: he made Boris Johnson look good.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 33,816
    nichomar said:

    So another Johnson recovery announcement, £1 billion on schools over ten years (£100m/ year) not really a lot, any idea of the UK annual schools capital budget? and yet again who’s going to build the new schools.

    Fact check

    760 million over the next academic year
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,307
    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Jeez. I'm not repeating Phil's erroneous message which should be banned for spreading false virus info.

    Face masks are clearly helpful for preventing the spread of this respiratory borne illness, both for those who have the virus and those who don't wish to catch it.

    There will always be nay'sayers. There are some who think the moon landings never happened and that if you sail out beyond California you fall off the edge of the earth.

    Spreading such nonsense in this case kills people.
    Isn’t that what Phil is saying?

    Wearing a mask protects other people not you. If everyone wears a mask everyone is safer
    Except that masks do protect the wearer. Your last sentence is correct.
    They can do - but only well designed ones. Remember at the start of this crisis there were two main arguments raised against mass wearing of masks - 1) to get individual protection the masks need to be of a certain design and quality and worn in the correct way (and if not they could potentially increase danger of self infection) 2) Resource of masks of proper quality is scarce and needs to be reserved for those most in need.

    I don’t know about the second of these points, but I don’t think the scientific view of the first has changed particularly. However the essential argument put forward for masks wearing is to prevent spread to others - and importantly this can be achieved with pretty much any type of basic face covering regardless of design or quality (provided of course it isn’t made of a material that irritates and actively triggers coughing and sneezing!). Which shouldn’t be dismissed - wearing face covering in my experience can create dryness of mouths/throats etc)
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 21,517

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Jeez. I'm not repeating Phil's erroneous message which should be banned for spreading false virus info.

    Face masks are clearly helpful for preventing the spread of this respiratory borne illness, both for those who have the virus and those who don't wish to catch it.

    There will always be nay'sayers. There are some who think the moon landings never happened and that if you sail out beyond California you fall off the edge of the earth.

    Spreading such nonsense in this case kills people.
    Pardon?

    If anything Phil's post was encouraging mask wearing and what he said - that wearing a mask is primarily to prevent transmission from you to someone else - is exactly what the experts have been saying for weeks and why they (quite rightly) want us all to wear them. What was 'nonsense' about his post that it should be banned?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 1,307
    edited June 29

    nichomar said:

    So another Johnson recovery announcement, £1 billion on schools over ten years (£100m/ year) not really a lot, any idea of the UK annual schools capital budget? and yet again who’s going to build the new schools.

    Fact check

    760 million over the next academic year
    You think a “schools building programme” can be put in place from scratch over that time period?

    Fact check - govt do fund schools capital already.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 3,845
    I'm a bit surprised OGH isn't used to getting this kind of missive.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 5,613
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:


    The pardon by Pence question is interesting and may have consequences for the 'year Trump will leave' betting market. Giving Nixon a pardon didn't work out well for Gerald Ford indeed, whose general election loss is widely blamed on that including by Ford himself, but on the other hand Pence may think he can't win a primary with the Trumpian base if he doesn't award a pardon.

    Yes, I don't think Trump could be confident about this, that's one of the reasons I think Pence only gets it it Trump is either dead or unable to communicate. Trump is more likely to go with someone who is definitely on his team, like Barr, or better someone in his family, ie Ivanka or Kushner.
    What would Trump be pardoned for? He's not been charged with anything, and the cynic in me doubts any incoming president will be anxious to subject foreign policy to the criminal law.
    There seem to be a fairly clear obstruction of justice charges that former prosecutors think he would be indicted for if he wasn't president.
    https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

    This seems to be a pattern of behaviour - also see the attempt to fire the SDNY prosecutor - and these are cases that are already largely being investigated and other suspects charged. The prosecutors are probably not happy about their investigations being obstructed, so you'd think they'd bring the charges unless the new administration tried to stop them.
    Yes but I remain sceptical that any future president of either party will be anxious to establish that foreign policy is subject to criminal law. Sleeping dogs will lie.
    Not really up to the President. Interfering in judicial process is part of what got us here.
    Unless you’re suggesting Biden pardons him ? :smile:
    I'm suggesting the new President's Justice Department might find more productive uses of its time and energy. When the chips are down, I would expect a pardon, but mainly I expect the chips to stay up. (A lazy pedant wonders if unplayed chips are properly described as up. Any casino-goers on pb?)
    Chips not in play are in your hand or your stack, surely?
    Yes chips not being in the used in the hand are your stack. Never heard of them as being up, or indeed moving chips into the pot as being "down" so guess it is very outdated terminology from a poker perspective.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 5,613
    rcs1000 said:

    Ummm... if I had a position on Pence being the nominee and I wanted to get out with a small profit, I'd probably email OGH anonymous tip, and get out while the going is good...

    All that being said:

    - Trump doesn't like losing
    - Trump might need to be pardoned, which requires his successor is someone extremely loyal

    And he might well be ill. Certainly some of the recent videos, of him struggling to raise a glass to his mouth, of him needing help walking, etc., are suggesting of health problems.

    One in ten for not being nominee... seems a little skinny, mind.

    From a previous article and comments here I thought he could pardon himself?
  • Hold on, £1bn for schools over 10 years? They need £6.7bn according to the NAO just to meet the backlog of repairs, this money isn't even a drop in the ocean.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 1,696
    Andy_JS said:

    "How out of touch is the Tory party?

    To retain his majority, Boris Johnson is going to have to wage that 'war on woke'
    BY TIM BALE"

    https://unherd.com/2020/06/how-out-of-touch-is-the-tory-party/

    An interesting article and good read. But Bale confuses two sorts of 'liberal'. The sort of social liberal who think liberalism means everyone should think the same sorts of Woke thoughts, and should be required to do so, and tends to be identified with Labour members, is the first. The second is the old fashioned sort, who believe in genuine freedom of thought and speech together with the rule of law. Most centrists believe in something like the second sort (I think) and too few people are speaking up for them.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 5,613

    Hold on, £1bn for schools over 10 years? They need £6.7bn according to the NAO just to meet the backlog of repairs, this money isn't even a drop in the ocean.

    I think its for the year not over the 10. From the guardian "Money for the rest of the nine years of the scheme will be set out at the next government spending review, which is expected this autumn."

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/28/johnson-pledges-1bn-over-10-years-for-school-rebuilding-in-england
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 18,829
    I wonder, is OGH's email a plant designed to getting us, and people like us, discussing that and not Johnson's, and his sidekick Williamson's, politicalisation of the post of National Security Adviser in the UK.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 14,083
    Sandpit said:


    Speaking as someone with a bet on him making it all the way to the end of his term that's worth much more I intended due to cybercoin fluctuations, I can totally fucking imagine him doing that.

    LOL, make sure he doesn’t find out about your bet!
    Mr President Sir if you're reading this, let me just say that my counterparty is a huge liberal and when he told me he thought you would resign partway through or be indicted for crimes I said no, President Trump will have the strength and perseverance to survive to the end of his term without being dragged down by the swamp, and carry on until the last possible moment so he doesn't miss a single chance to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 18,829
    Just found this from yesterday in the Guardian (Jonathan Bosanquet) 'congratulations to Dr Todd Gray, a historian at the University of Exeter who, after a two-year campaign, has persuaded the Oxford English Dictionary to include the word “quilling” – the old practice of politicians bribing voters with copious amounts of alcohol to win their favour – in future editions. I can’t be certain but this seems to me very like what Boris Johnson has just done with his welcome announcement about pubs reopening on 4 July.'

    I nominate 'quilling' as the word of the day, and intend too find uses for it.
  • Hold on, £1bn for schools over 10 years? They need £6.7bn according to the NAO just to meet the backlog of repairs, this money isn't even a drop in the ocean.

    I think its for the year not over the 10. From the guardian "Money for the rest of the nine years of the scheme will be set out at the next government spending review, which is expected this autumn."

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jun/28/johnson-pledges-1bn-over-10-years-for-school-rebuilding-in-england
    Okay sounds a bit better.

    However, it is essentially reintroducing the Schools for the Future programme that they cut in 2010, so with inflation they’re going to need to commit to many billions per year to be back where we were 10 years ago. Let’s hope they do.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 35,920
    On topic: I'd take such emails with a pinch of salt.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,453

    nichomar said:

    So another Johnson recovery announcement, £1 billion on schools over ten years (£100m/ year) not really a lot, any idea of the UK annual schools capital budget? and yet again who’s going to build the new schools.

    Fact check

    760 million over the next academic year
    The 50 school building projects, which will be identified later in the year, will start from September 2021, in a 10-year programme with £1bn in funding. So not next academic year. Will it ever happen? Who remembers these promises and tracks and reports back on progress? How do we know it really is new money not just budget redefinition? It would be far more believable if there was a project plan published alongside the announcement identifying which schools and when. Yes I’m cynical but it’s easy to cut something one year and put it back the next year with great fanfare.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 1,148
    IanB2 said:

    If they really were using library photos to cover Trump’s absence, surely there would be an amateur sleuth in the US on the case, spotting differences in hairstyle, suntan, weather, angle of the sun, etc.

    Isn't there always a pool reporter with POTUS?

    They'd know if he wasn't where he was supposed to be.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 5,613
    edited June 29
    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "How out of touch is the Tory party?

    To retain his majority, Boris Johnson is going to have to wage that 'war on woke'
    BY TIM BALE"

    https://unherd.com/2020/06/how-out-of-touch-is-the-tory-party/

    An interesting article and good read. But Bale confuses two sorts of 'liberal'. The sort of social liberal who think liberalism means everyone should think the same sorts of Woke thoughts, and should be required to do so, and tends to be identified with Labour members, is the first. The second is the old fashioned sort, who believe in genuine freedom of thought and speech together with the rule of law. Most centrists believe in something like the second sort (I think) and too few people are speaking up for them.
    I agree the use of the word liberal has changed and means different things to different groups but the survey seems to be using questions in line with the "old fashioned" sort. The ones in the article are death sentence, longer sentences, film censorship, teach children to obey and young people having respect for British values.

    It is a good article btw.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 1,684
    Thanks to @Phil , @Big_G_NorthWales and @Ishmael_Z on last thread re truncated left side on phone.

    I had previously tried desktop mode without success. Tried again. Failed with Firefox but worked with Chrome.

    So thank you. Surprising how often I couldn't work out the first word with only 1 character being stripped off.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 250
    Charles said:

    Phil said:

    rcs1000 said:

    LadyG said:

    Florida has just reported 10,600 new cases in a day. Another record

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/

    For comparison, on the worst day of the outbreak in the UK, we recorded 8,600 cases, and then it fell away quite steeply. Florida is still going up fast.

    A disaster is potentially unfolding there

    I wonder if it's too late for Trump to get behind masks. Perhaps if they were red masks, with Make America Great Again on them.

    I'm really not clear on the right wing objection to masks. You protect yourself with a gun, why not protect yourself with a mask? It has the added benefit of stopping the deep state from applying facial recognition software on you successfully. Lockdown - I completely see the objection to. Masks, not so much.
    Indeed: especially as masks dramatically reduce the risk of needing lockdown.

    Having thought about this, I think there are two reasons Trump hates masks:

    1. It reminds him there is a problem. He's a massive fan of the Power of Positive Thinking (the book), and it has over the years worked for him. Wearing a mask goes against this, because it is in effect negative speech.

    2. He's a bit vain. He thinks he looks good, and he thinks he'd look less good (and more scared) in a mask. And if he's not going to wear a mask, other people shouldn't either.

    But it's also dumb. Modest mask etiquette reduces R substantially.
    Masks are hugely uncomfortable, and a very significant social barrier.

    I only wear them in close proximity environments in public (like trains or the tube) and I possibly would in a busy office too.

    Otherwise, it's a rather dystopian placebo.
    Masks are not really to protect you (they’re pretty crap at that role, although there is weak evidence is they do have some effect). What masks are very effective at is protecting everybody else from you, should you happen to be infected & not realise it.

    So masks are essentially communitarian. We wear them & accept a certain mild level of discomfort in order to protect those around us from the possibility of being infected by a horrible disease. The more pro-social a society is, the more likely it is that people will wear masks & the less affected by Covid-19 that society will be.

    (An aside: I bet the anti-vaxx conspiracy groups are full of anti-mask types.)
    Sweden is essentially communitarian and a pro-social society, but I can tell you that mask-wearing is extremely unusual here.

    Admittedly I almost never use public transport so I’m missing that environment, but I do work in a busy office and visit libraries, shops, hospital, tourist attractions and other public spaces, and I see a mask-wearer maybe once a week. Still taken aback every time I see one.
    Jeez. I'm not repeating Phil's erroneous message which should be banned for spreading false virus info.

    Face masks are clearly helpful for preventing the spread of this respiratory borne illness, both for those who have the virus and those who don't wish to catch it.

    There will always be nay'sayers. There are some who think the moon landings never happened and that if you sail out beyond California you fall off the edge of the earth.

    Spreading such nonsense in this case kills people.
    Isn’t that what Phil is saying?

    Wearing a mask protects other people not you. If everyone wears a mask everyone is safer
    This is exactly what I was saying. They do protect you as well, but that protection is limited - the (weak) evidence is that you benefit from a reduction in exposure that’s worth having, but not enough to expose yourself unnecessarily.

    Here’s a recent review paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7191274

    Royal Society Delve group report: https://royalsociety.org/news/2020/05/delve-group-publishes-evidence-paper-on-use-of-face-masks/

    The available evidence suggests that masks are of little to maybe limited benefit at protecting you, but pretty good at protecting others if you’re infected. Everyone should wear them when in public in order to protect the community from asymptomatic infection.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 5,613

    IanB2 said:

    If they really were using library photos to cover Trump’s absence, surely there would be an amateur sleuth in the US on the case, spotting differences in hairstyle, suntan, weather, angle of the sun, etc.

    Isn't there always a pool reporter with POTUS?

    They'd know if he wasn't where he was supposed to be.
    Perhaps they were too busy managing their betfair book and tipping off related internet websites........or not.
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 5,453

    I wonder, is OGH's email a plant designed to getting us, and people like us, discussing that and not Johnson's, and his sidekick Williamson's, politicalisation of the post of National Security Adviser in the UK.

    I’m not sure many people actually knew we had a NSA let alone what he/she does. I thought it was all contained within the inter working of MI5/6 GCHQ etc
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 26,675

    I wonder, is OGH's email a plant designed to getting us, and people like us, discussing that and not Johnson's, and his sidekick Williamson's, politicalisation of the post of National Security Adviser in the UK.

    Williamson was dire on R4 just now. If Johnson appoints on merit, he should soon be gone.
Sign In or Register to comment.