hypochondriac

Looking at some Americans, it's a case that they felt the economy was better under trump and the immigration situation, they like some of the proposals and the team he is proposing for government and they aren't Kamala fans thinks she stands for nothing and object that she got the nomination without going through the proper process. Obviously doesn't help when some on the Democrat side denigrate people who have voted Trump in the past. It's not entirely about people not making their mind up about a candidate though, it's motivating people to actually vote. If voting were mandatory like Australia you'd imagine Harris would win handily. A unifying candidate is sorely needed in America if that is even possible. Obama was always embarrassingly superior to both of these candidates for example.

Being greener than a diesel car doesn't make it green.

Nope. Climate change is an inevitability unless we go back to the stone age. Currently we are set to massively hobble ourselves whilst other countries essentially do what they like with some small concessions. Billions and billions of pounds and restrictions on our lives for very little tangible benefit and all because it makes a few people feel good about themselves. Much better to face up to the reality which everyone will do in a few decades anyway that we have zero chance of restricting the likes of China and India to anywhere near the required amount. Accept that climate change will happen and plan accordingly looking to live alongside the newly changed climate.

Exactly.

Still looks to be very close according to the polling with maybe a slight favouring of Harris to win. I'll be interested to see how accurate the polling has been.

Deliberately taking something out of context and twisting it's meaning does Democrat supporters no favours. Trump says enough objectionable stuff without having to invent things he said.

You're suggesting I wasn't aware of what China are doing. I don't deny that they've done a bit. I wasn't talking solely about China though and note the language I used "doing enough about it at a quick enough rate to change anything substantial." You also didn't mention things ike this:

If man made climate change is a thing and g generally a negative thing, there's not really any prospect of a tiny country producing insignificant amounts of greenhouse gases like us persuading massive countries who do make a difference from doing enough about it at a quick enough rate to change anything substantial. Far better to pour a load of money in to allow us to mitigate and live with the effects of a changing planet. No reason at all that we can't utilise technology to assist us with this endeavour. Going back to the pre industrial age or trying to force people not to drive, not eat meat etc is not really a viable or practical solution and all it does is build resentment amongst the population in countries like ours when we know in our hearts it doesn't move the needle in The slightest and simply hobbled us and our quality of life whilst other nations can pretty much do what they like unimpeded by comparison.

At a 12 month high for 10 year this morning.

For me, the worst signing we have made this year which is saying something when our loan signings have also been terrible.

Great. It's not as bad as the worst budget in most of our lifetimes. Do you have a comparison with any other budget in the last twenty years?

So the market reaction is a sign of them being hysterical? Was that the case for market reactions for previous budgets?

Do you think that's a signal that the markets agree with your assessment that the budget was very promising though?

And kamala has the black vote already. It's the white male vote she needs more of - and she won't reach more of them than doing Rogan.

Happy to go on some no mark podcast with 750k views though instead of the largest podcast in the world, miles bigger than every television network with hundreds of millions of views for every podcast he does.

Common criticisms I have seen from Americans is that Harris is robotic, only does scripted or tightly controlled interviews so comes across as inauthentic and uses apt of. Words to say very little of substance. You'd think a long form interview having a chat with someone with a proven record of being cordial and not hammering someone with gotcha questions would be the perfect opportunity to counter almost all of those criticisms. Imagine if she was herself for three hours and the young largely male demographic gets to see a completely different side to her. Like I said, I think it's a huge own goal not to do it.

his campaign is doing the correct thing and making him part of the news cycle. I haven't seen or heard anything about Kamala at all. Political Stunts are the right way to go at this stage. JD vance has now done Rogan and taken the slot offered to Kamala. It's crazy she hasn't done it given Trump got 100 million views in a week and it's the exact demographic Harris needs.

Not sure why everyone is crying about the Puerto Rico comment. I agree with well-known lefty Jon Stewart: https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1851138132596408499?t=VK8uONLQlyVAMMvFy_63AA&s=19

That wasn't the message that Democrats were sending out for months right up until he was pressured to step down.

I'd say the market reaction is a pretty good judge. They certainly were with Truss.

Dearie me.

It's not about if you are offended, it's about motivating a small percentage of voters to vote Trump who maybe weren't voting previously. An offhand dismissive comment like that may influence enough voters to make a difference. In a close race like this why take the risk?

Wrong thread!

Whether it makes a difference or not, it's still a really dumb thing to say a week out from the election. Poor old semi-senile Joe is adding to the problems Kamala has when she really doesn't need any more.

In a very tight race it only needs to have a relatively small impact to make a difference. The comment from Hillary certainly did and you've got Trump capitalising already today driving a Trump garbage truck.