|
|
Post by rickyfullerbeer on Oct 29, 2024 21:54:38 GMT
Well it looks like Donald may have taken a decisive lead in the contest. Putting any partisan opinions aside about the man, what do we think the main focus of his new term will be and how will he go about it? Interested to hear the thoughts of those in the US. Global conflict Economy Law and Order The focus will be the on himself and how he can keep hold of power. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 29, 2024 21:57:04 GMT
"Key points ... A week to go until the US election - and the polls are on a knife edge." ๐ค Sorry I was talking about bookies odds mainly. It was just a question, if youโre not interested then itโs fine I was interested, that's why I asked. Obviously it turns out that he hasn't actually developed a 'decisive lead' after all ... |
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Oct 29, 2024 22:14:44 GMT
"Key points ... A week to go until the US election - and the polls are on a knife edge." ๐ค Sorry I was talking about bookies odds mainly. It was just a question, if youโre not interested then itโs fine I accepted Dario Gโs autism a while back. Like 2005 ๐ |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Oct 29, 2024 22:48:29 GMT
Heโs not going to prison is he, letโs be honest. But itโs really important he gets things right. Not saying he will just inviting some balanced opinion and not the usual shite Good luck mate. Thereโs clearly no point in asking a reasonable question on here any more. The lefties are clearly upset about a few things |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Oct 29, 2024 22:48:41 GMT
Are Putin's words acceptable evidence? e.g. source. "As soon as they declare in Kyiv that they are ready for such a decision and begin a real withdrawal of troops from these regions, and also officially announce the abandonment of their plans to join NATO โ on our side, immediately, literally at the same minute, an order will follow to cease fire and begin negotiations," Mr Putin said. Are you not better using primary rather than secondary or tertiary sources if you wish to avoid propoganda and get factual information? The speech in full can be accessed here (presuming transcript is correct). He also references the previous peace agreements in the speech. This is just one reference: "From the outset, we consistently proposed diplomatic solutions to the crisis, as I mentioned earlier today. These included negotiations in Belarus and Turkiye, as well as the withdrawal of troops from Kiev to facilitate the signing of the Istanbul Agreements, which had been broadly accepted. However, these efforts were also rebuffed. The West and Kiev persisted in their aim to defeat us. Yet, as you know, these efforts ultimately faltered." mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1957107/To try and imply that Putin wants to conquer and control Ukraine is incorrect. The speech details the 2014 coup and negotiations, the Minsk agreements, instanbul agreements, Belarus negotiations and much more. If his goal is to conquer Ukraine then why did he agree to the Minsk agreements and the Instanbul communique? Why did the west pressure Ukraine to not accept the bilaterally negotiated peace deal or implement the Minsk agreement reforms? Why did he try and find a diplomatic solution to the coup rather than use it as an excuse to invade? I don't expect an answer to the above. I'm still waiting after asking 10 times for examples of how the west has used propoganda in relation to this conflict and I'm yet to receive an answer from you. Seems you can only spot "propoganda" if it's someone Biden, Harris or Trump tells you is a baddie. Am I misinterpreting your post that Putin didn't invoke a perceived NATO expansion as a pretext to invade Ukraine and deNazification of course? Notwithstanding that. You have made much play of the Instanbul Communique that if acted upon the "Special Military Operation" would have ended a long time ago. Strange that you have no comment to make on the earlier Istanbul Charter which I linked to you. The Instanbul Charter (1999) is unambiguous and reaffirms the inherent right of each OSCE state (Russia and Ukraine and 54 Others) has the right to choose its own security arrangements. To spell it out Russia has no cover to invoke NATO expansion, real or imagined, as a reason to invade Ukraine under the Istanbul Charter it signed in 1999 |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 1:42:18 GMT
Are Putin's words acceptable evidence? e.g. source. "As soon as they declare in Kyiv that they are ready for such a decision and begin a real withdrawal of troops from these regions, and also officially announce the abandonment of their plans to join NATO โ on our side, immediately, literally at the same minute, an order will follow to cease fire and begin negotiations," Mr Putin said. Are you not better using primary rather than secondary or tertiary sources if you wish to avoid propoganda and get factual information? The speech in full can be accessed here (presuming transcript is correct). He also references the previous peace agreements in the speech. This is just one reference: I agree we should use primary sources where possible. I assumed that ABC, Reuters and others accurately quoted the original source and it seems they did. Here are Putin's terms. "So, these conditions are simple. The Ukrainian troops must be completely withdrawn from the Donetsk and Lugansk peopleโs republics and Kherson and Zaporozhye regions. Let me note that they must be withdrawn from the entire territory of these regions within their administrative borders at the time of their being part of Ukraine. As soon as Kiev declares that it is ready to make this decision and begin a real withdrawal of troops from these regions, and also officially notifies that it abandons its plans to join NATO, our side will follow an order to cease fire and start negotiations will be issued by us that very moment. I repeat โ we will do this expeditiously. Of course, we also guarantee an unhindered and safe withdrawal of Ukrainian units and formations." He demands that Ukraine hand over its defensive lines and a huge amount of territory, and becomes defenceless, in order to get a cease fire and open negotiations. And then russia will invade again. Just like they invaded Crimea and Donbas in 2014, and all of Ukraine in 2022. Just like when they invaded Moldova and Chechnya (twice) and Georgia. Yes I understand that Putin makes a load of complaints that he thinks will make his genocide and conquests more appealing to other people, but he is a liar and a mass murderer who wants to conquer large parts of Ukraine and put the rest of it under his jackboot. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 30, 2024 1:48:58 GMT
Sorry I was talking about bookies odds mainly. It was just a question, if youโre not interested then itโs fine I was interested, that's why I asked. Obviously it turns out that he hasn't actually developed a 'decisive lead' after all ... At the start of last week the Murdoch press started saying Trump had taken a lead that was growing. I smelt a long tailed rodent when it became apparent other media outlets were saying nothing of the sort. It does however give him a foundation to say he's been robbed if he loses. In reality, six days until the election it seems tighter than ever. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 30, 2024 1:55:46 GMT
I was interested, that's why I asked. Obviously it turns out that he hasn't actually developed a 'decisive lead' after all ... At the start of last week the Murdoch press started saying Trump had taken a lead that was growing. I smelt a long tailed rodent when it became apparent other media outlets were saying nothing of the sort. It does however give him a foundation to say he's been robbed if he loses. In reality, six days until the election it seems tighter than ever. Indeed Joe, that's why I was surprised to see Badge claiming that Trump had taken a decisive lead without providing any source for the claim, when everything else I'd seen today was suggesting it was tighter than ever. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 1:59:35 GMT
I was interested, that's why I asked. Obviously it turns out that he hasn't actually developed a 'decisive lead' after all ... At the start of last week the Murdoch press started saying Trump had taken a lead that was growing. I smelt a long tailed rodent when it became apparent other media outlets were saying nothing of the sort. It does however give him a foundation to say he's been robbed if he loses. In reality, six days until the election it seems tighter than ever. 538 have Harris up by about 2% in the votes, but Trump is more likely to win 53:47 because of the way that the electoral college favours Republicans. Their model is really good IMO but also it's just really hard to predict these things so no model will be perfect. Also if you predict 50:50 then you can't be proven wrong in any one election, pro move that!  Voting laws by republicans have also stacked the deck a bit. It's questionable how free and fair elections are in a bunch of states, they're stacked against Democrats. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 30, 2024 2:06:53 GMT
At the start of last week the Murdoch press started saying Trump had taken a lead that was growing. I smelt a long tailed rodent when it became apparent other media outlets were saying nothing of the sort. It does however give him a foundation to say he's been robbed if he loses. In reality, six days until the election it seems tighter than ever. 538 have Harris up by about 2% in the votes, but Trump is more likely to win 53:47 because of the way that the electoral college favours Republicans. Their model is really good IMO but also it's just really hard to predict these things so no model will be perfect. Also if you predict 50:50 then you can't be proven wrong in any one election, pro move that! Voting laws by republicans have also stacked the deck a bit. It's questionable how free and fair elections are in a bunch of states, they're stacked against Democrats. Rory Stewart said a lot of pollsters are still bruised after getting it so wrong in 2016. So they sit on the fence. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 2:09:24 GMT
538 have Harris up by about 2% in the votes, but Trump is more likely to win 53:47 because of the way that the electoral college favours Republicans. Their model is really good IMO but also it's just really hard to predict these things so no model will be perfect. Also if you predict 50:50 then you can't be proven wrong in any one election, pro move that! Voting laws by republicans have also stacked the deck a bit. It's questionable how free and fair elections are in a bunch of states, they're stacked against Democrats. Rory Stewart said a lot of pollsters are still bruised after getting it so wrong in 2016. So they sit on the fence. Hmm did he say how they sit on the fence? I'm a bit interested in polling because I have to do a lot of statistical stuff for work. Always up for learning new things, although I work with sensors that measure simple stuff like radiation instead of complicated stuff like people! |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 30, 2024 2:12:23 GMT
Rory Stewart said a lot of pollsters are still bruised after getting it so wrong in 2016. So they sit on the fence. Hmm did he say how they sit on the fence? I'm a bit interested in polling because I have to do a lot of statistical stuff for work. Always up for learning new things, although I work with sensors that measure simple stuff like radiation instead of complicated stuff like people! He didn't say how. But it might be as simple as making one a few % lower and another a few % bigger to keep it tight. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 2:14:53 GMT
Hmm did he say how they sit on the fence? I'm a bit interested in polling because I have to do a lot of statistical stuff for work. Always up for learning new things, although I work with sensors that measure simple stuff like radiation instead of complicated stuff like people! He didn't say how. But it might be as simple as making one a few % lower and another a few % bigger to keep it tight. There are so many polling outfits I can't keep up and I bet some of them are shady. We know a big one called Rasmussen was sharing info with the Trump campaign which sounds like a big no no for a legit pollster. For the more legit independent ones I read that some of them have started using a thing called "recalled vote". You ask them who they voted for last time out to find out if they're sneakily Democratic or Republican and then shift the numbers. It sounded like there was some data to back it up and it doesn't sound crazy to me, but who the fuck knows! |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 2:24:27 GMT
I don't believe he tried to end US democracy. A revolution with only 2 deaths is just an out of control party ! I think all of these are important, but it's not just any one of them. Also, a lot of the media has been awful at explaining this because the liberals like to "both sides" and the corporate stuff is either pro-Trump or cowering before him. Because they know Democrats support freedom and won't punish them, while Trump will use the power of the state to hurt them if he feels they slighted him. Like when he allegedly fucked with the Amazon contract. This is my understanding, although I haven't read much of the new Smith documents so I could be corrected: - He stoked up and caused the insurrection on January 6th. Even if death numbers were low, it was a violent attempt to threaten democracy and should not be supported. - He refused to accept the result and started a campaign of lies. This is absolute poison for democracy, the peaceful transfer of power is sacred and Trump stamped all over it. - He called and threatened and plotted to overthrow the election results in states. - He prepared a conspiracy with suites of fake electors where his loyalists in the Republican house would overthrow the election. He tried to end US democracy, he's madae it very clear he'll try to do that again, and I can't believe people are so chill about it. His business dealings, I'm pretty sure everyone at the top of governments isn't crystal clear about how all of their income came to be. Personally I think there are shades of grey and things aren't just black and white. I think we should support getting better and not just accept getting worse, and a way to work out what's better is to do an apples-to-apples comparison. - Ran a business in office, a clear conflict of interest: Trump yes, everyone else no. - Tried to use the state to blackmail a foreign country for his own political power, completely beyond the pale and done by Trump but no evidence of it being done by anyone else. - Hid his tax returns, everyone else released theirs. I think transparency is important, and supporting Trump means you support more corruption. "But there is some corruption already so we should have more" doesn't persuade me, I think "we have some corruption so we should work to get rid of it and not add more" is more my jam. Isolating kids from their families, not so good I really don't minimise that so quickly. Mass child abuse, intentionally throwing thousands of kids into cages just to cause extra suffering is just fucking disgusting in my mind. To continue supporting Trump you really have to be able to minimise and dismiss the suffering of thousands of kids. I don't think you really do support child abuse, but if you support Trump then you're supporting it. I know a lot of people just really, really hate liberals or Democrats or whatever, but I can't just get over the child abuse. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 30, 2024 2:27:22 GMT
He didn't say how. But it might be as simple as making one a few % lower and another a few % bigger to keep it tight. There are so many polling outfits I can't keep up and I bet some of them are shady. We know a big one called Rasmussen was sharing info with the Trump campaign which sounds like a big no no for a legit pollster. For the more legit independent ones I read that some of them have started using a thing called "recalled vote". You ask them who they voted for last time out to find out if they're sneakily Democratic or Republican and then shift the numbers. It sounded like there was some data to back it up and it doesn't sound crazy to me, but who the fuck knows! Recalled vote doesn't sound reliable. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 2:32:54 GMT
I don't expect an answer to the above. I'm still waiting after asking 10 times for examples of how the west has used propoganda in relation to this conflict and I'm yet to receive an answer from you. Seems you can only spot "propoganda" if it's someone Biden, Harris or Trump tells you is a baddie. Sorry mate, thought I'd answered that. I think there's tons of propaganda from many sides. Russia's is more unified, the western less so because we're more pluralistic democracies and also multiple countries. I quoted the first 5 you put in the Ukraine thread as examples. Depending on how you define propaganda (e.g. just "Material disseminated by the advocates or opponents of a doctrine or cause."? Or does it matter if it's misleading?) then a few things spring to mind. - The Biden admin was very open in pushing the material showing russia was going to invade Ukraine, even as your russian sources denied it was going to happen. This was a propaganda campaign, but it was also honest. - The Ghost of Kyiv - 99.9999999% sure this was bullshit to build up hope. - Wonder effects promised from sanctions or individual weapons like Leopards or F-16s. They all shift the balance, but there is often messaging that they are somehow "key" to a strategic victory when very few systems are. I believe this is done to build short-term public support and pressure to send them. - Ukrainian claims of russian losses. I think the personnel numbers are probably close to real russian casualties, but e.g. tanks, artillery and aircraft are way overstated. My guess is this is done for morale. - US DOD claims that long-range strikes into russia won't really help. Clear and absolute bullshit. I'm not sure why they're bullshitting but the obvious reason would be that the Biden admin has fallen for Putin's fake threats again and they're scared of escalation again. They don't want to admit they're making the same mistake they already made a bunch of times (delaying artillery, tanks, HIMARS, DPICMs, ATACMS, F-16s...) so they're coming up with bullshit to deflect blame.
- lots of the pro-dictatorship people in the West pushing anything that they can use as an excuse to cut off Ukraine. "We want peace, NATO bad, America bad, Putin good, military complex makes money and that's bad, we should give more money to the military for China instead, russia can't be beaten" etc etc. The Orbans and Trumps and their propaganda arms pushing that. |
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Oct 30, 2024 2:34:52 GMT
There are so many polling outfits I can't keep up and I bet some of them are shady. We know a big one called Rasmussen was sharing info with the Trump campaign which sounds like a big no no for a legit pollster. For the more legit independent ones I read that some of them have started using a thing called "recalled vote". You ask them who they voted for last time out to find out if they're sneakily Democratic or Republican and then shift the numbers. It sounded like there was some data to back it up and it doesn't sound crazy to me, but who the fuck knows! Recalled vote doesn't sound reliable. I honestly don't know, it sounded interesting but I haven't had time to look into it. Maybe we'll see if it improved things or made them worse after the votes are counted. And... the work data just finished downloading so now I have to go back and work on my own stats. I won't be using recalled vote there. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 30, 2024 3:49:38 GMT
Rory Stewart said a lot of pollsters are still bruised after getting it so wrong in 2016. So they sit on the fence. Hmm did he say how they sit on the fence? I'm a bit interested in polling because I have to do a lot of statistical stuff for work. Always up for learning new things, although I work with sensors that measure simple stuff like radiation instead of complicated stuff like people! I think you might enjoy this! ๐ |
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Oct 30, 2024 9:56:09 GMT
Hmm did he say how they sit on the fence? I'm a bit interested in polling because I have to do a lot of statistical stuff for work. Always up for learning new things, although I work with sensors that measure simple stuff like radiation instead of complicated stuff like people! I think you might enjoy this! ๐ The prediction itself was enjoyable but the reaction from Trump supporters to a man merely making a an objective prediction is terrifying. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 30, 2024 12:21:06 GMT
I think you might enjoy this! ๐ The prediction itself was enjoyable but the reaction from Trump supporters to a man merely making a an objective prediction is terrifying. It is. It's severely distressing. That's the mindset Trump has stirred up in them. He validates that nastiness |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Oct 30, 2024 16:39:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Oct 31, 2024 7:28:57 GMT
A hundred monkeys at a hundred typewriters could write Mein Kampf! ๐ฌ He's going to win isn't he! ๐ |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 31, 2024 8:02:13 GMT
A hundred monkeys at a hundred typewriters could write Mein Kampf! ๐ฌ He's going to win isn't he! ๐ ๐ฑ |
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 31, 2024 8:06:14 GMT
A hundred monkeys at a hundred typewriters could write Mein Kampf! ๐ฌ He's going to win isn't he! ๐ I suspect he is, yes. I can't see America voting in a black woman. The most depressing aspect of which will be having to endure another four years (hopefully just four - an alarming thought that it's even a consideration that it might not be...) of the drivel that'll spew from his mouth on a daily basis and get news coverage because he's president. Biden's senility was bad enough, but thankfully he kept quiet most of the time. Trump won't. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Oct 31, 2024 8:12:26 GMT
A hundred monkeys at a hundred typewriters could write Mein Kampf! ๐ฌ He's going to win isn't he! ๐ I suspect he is, yes. I can't see America voting in a black woman. The most depressing aspect of which will be having to endure another four years (hopefully just four - an alarming thought that it's even a consideration that it might not be...) of the drivel that'll spew from his mouth on a daily basis and get news coverage because he's president. Biden's senility was bad enough, but thankfully he kept quiet most of the time. Trump won't. At least if he karks it his VP isn't a raging right wing lunatic..... ๐ |
|
|
|
Post by Tom_stokiepmre89 on Oct 31, 2024 10:36:38 GMT
Huge gaffe by the president. "The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters".  |
|
|
|
Post by rickyfullerbeer on Oct 31, 2024 10:44:49 GMT
Huge gaffe by the president. "The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters". Itโs scarcely believable how bad they all are. Itโs like none of them want to win. |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Oct 31, 2024 12:17:44 GMT
What Biden said was daft. But JD Vance said he's tired of everyone being offended by everything. So it shouldn't bother them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Oct 31, 2024 12:29:22 GMT
What Biden said was daft. But JD Vance said he's tired of everyone being offended by everything. So it shouldn't bother them. They're already capitalising on it. Trump's been wearing a hiviz jacket and driving a garbage truck! ๐๐๐ |
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Oct 31, 2024 12:33:17 GMT
โI want to protect the women of our country ... I'm gonna do it whether the women like it or not"
An unfortunate choice of words from a man found liable for sexual abuse.
|
|
