Scrutable

Grumble wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:40 am

nekomatic wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:01 am

Err… badgers?

Surely this is a hoax? There were similar claims about Trump watching shark programmes on telly incessantly which turned out to be a hoax a couple of years back.

Erm, those claims didn't turn out to be a hoax, as far as I know.

They were one of the claims made by Stormy Daniels, whose account has not been refuted. Although her celebrity lawyer is being sentenced for trying to blackmail Nike.

Well Stone is getting sentenced, but the DoJ can't decide whether it's pushing for leniency or not...

In other Trump news - apparently Parasite was terrible, how could the oscar have gone to a film from South Korea given trading issues there (as obviously all of those involved in the film are involved in government decisions) and WHY CAN'T WE HAVE MORE FILMS LIKE "GONE WITH THE WIND"!?!?!?!? #imnotaracist

He also seems to be asking for Obama to be impeached.

Retrospective impeachment? Next he'll be digging up former presidents to put them on trial...

Struggling to pronounce words at a rally again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 45956.html

FlammableFlower wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:50 am

Well Stone is getting sentenced, but the DoJ can't decide whether it's pushing for leniency or not...

In other Trump news - apparently Parasite was terrible, how could the oscar have gone to a film from South Korea given trading issues there (as obviously all of those involved in the film are involved in government decisions) and WHY CAN'T WE HAVE MORE FILMS LIKE "GONE WITH THE WIND"!?!?!?!? #imnotaracist

S.Korea's reply was " He probably couldn't read the subtitles "

rockdoctor wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 3:30 pm

Struggling to pronounce words at a rally again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 45956.html

more recent one that is even more obvious

https://twitter.com/TomJChicago/status/ ... 93345?s=20

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:05 pm

rockdoctor wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 3:30 pm

Struggling to pronounce words at a rally again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 45956.html

more recent one that is even more obvious

https://twitter.com/TomJChicago/status/ ... 93345?s=20

Love the mis-pronouncing in the first one - "Spent 4 years in privit"

rockdoctor wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 3:30 pm

Struggling to pronounce words at a rally again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 45956.html

And again:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-spe ... everything

I never realised India had a famous cricketer of Chinese origin, So Chin Tendle Curr. And Vere Ut Co Knee.


https://twitter.com/gregjames/status/12 ... 23905?s=19

Rich Scopie wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:36 pm

rockdoctor wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 3:30 pm

Struggling to pronounce words at a rally again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 45956.html

And again:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-spe ... everything

Well that's sort of understandable, it was in forrin. Even before any recent deteriation he probably would have struggled. He never was the brightest to say the least.

cvb wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:46 am

Rich Scopie wrote: ↑

Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:36 pm

rockdoctor wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2020 3:30 pm

Struggling to pronounce words at a rally again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 45956.html

And again:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-spe ... everything

Well that's sort of understandable, it was in forrin. Even before any recent deteriation he probably would have struggled. He never was the brightest to say the least.

Yup, and not exactly like praising relations with Pakistan


https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/m ... 2020-02-25

If Trump f.cks up the response to coronavirus he’ll be vulnerable in the election. This is a crisis he can’t bluff his way through, viruses don’t care. Hopefully for the sake of everyone there are some competent people left in the US government who can actually respond properly and limit the impact.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:16 pm

If Trump f.cks up the response to coronavirus he’ll be vulnerable in the election. This is a crisis he can’t bluff his way through, viruses don’t care. Hopefully for the sake of everyone there are some competent people left in the US government who can actually respond properly and limit the impact.

Was reading a thing saying Trump has already gutted some of the CDC's preparedness programmes that the Obama administration beefed up after H1N1 and Ebola, so that's not helpful.

But it also said the State level preparedness is quite variable, with places like New York / Massachussetts / California in better shape than others.

Still, everyone will be reassured that he's appointed the former governor of Indiana who was directly implicated in bungling the response to a disease outbreak, leading to large numbers of unnecessary deaths, as his point person for responding to this.

I get my reassurance from thinking about the mortality probability for 73 year old man with pre-existing conditions who meets a lot of people each day.

And I also think about a 78 year old man on the campaign trail who has recent serious heart problems. And a healthy 77 year old man, and a 78 year old who has had heart stents, and a healthy 70 year old woman, and wondering if I should be placing a bet on a 38 year old man.

Out of curiosity, what happens if a presidential candidate dies during the election campaign?

Just been having a look, and remember after the 2016 election, how people were pleading with the electoral college voters not to support Trump? Well, that election did have loads of faithless electors. However, most of them were people who refused to vote for Clinton when they should've done. The reasons for that were generally to support a republican candidate who wasn't Donald Trump, rather than because of any issue specifically with Clinton.

The cases for a few states are going through the various levels of court action, with the Supreme Court set to decide in April. Ten did it overall, four of them were from Washington, and three of those voted for Colin Powell rather than Clinton. (Wiki link)

The constitution was apparently created with the electoral college so as to allow electors some independence in their decision, and there's a fair chance that the Supreme Court could rule in support of that independence (ie fines, laws, etc restricting electors' actions could be unconstitutional).

Anyway, just thought I'd throw that little nugget in there. Ten faithless electors would have been enough to decide the 2000 Presidential Election, frinstance.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:00 am

Out of curiosity, what happens if a presidential candidate dies during the election campaign?

The answer is, a beautiful mess.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:29 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:00 am

Out of curiosity, what happens if a presidential candidate dies during the election campaign?

The answer is, a beautiful mess.

With Sanders and Trump, it's more a question if what happens if they both die.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 12:46 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:29 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:00 am

Out of curiosity, what happens if a presidential candidate dies during the election campaign?

The answer is, a beautiful mess.

With Sanders and Trump, it's more a question if what happens if they both die.

And if the Veep candidates die too? At what point does it end up with Nancy Pelosi in the White House?

AMS wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 7:04 pm

And if the Veep candidates die too?

Asking for a friend, are you?

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:29 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 10:00 am

Out of curiosity, what happens if a presidential candidate dies during the election campaign?

The answer is, a beautiful mess.

Any chance of a tl;dnr summary for those of us too tight to shell out to get over the pay wall?

Essentially, f.ck knows. If it's before the election but after a certain point, then some states won't allow the ballot to be changed even if one of the candidates is dead. The Dems or reps can replace the candidate through official procedures but it doesn't mean the ballots change. The ballots then cast may be for the party, or a dead candidate, and the supreme Court would likely have a very messy mess on their hands. On top of that as well, the electors might be subject to state laws which say they have to cast their vote for the dead candidate if they won the election in the state, even if they're disqualified from the presidency by being, you know, not alive. However, those laws themselves might be unconstitutional, and the electors might ultimately be able to cast a vote for whoever they want.

AMS wrote: ↑

Thu Feb 27, 2020 7:04 pm

And if the Veep candidates die too? At what point does it end up with Nancy Pelosi in the White House?

At the moment, as Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy is 2nd in line, so you'd only need Trump and Pence to die together in a gay sex romp (other deaths are available) for her to get to the first female president: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_St ... succession