Off Topic Thread 5.0

Neil3030 · 19-09-2020 2:37pm

Deleted User wrote: »

An incredible person, gifted intellect and an exceptional communicator.

After the Garland situation I think if a new candidate is forced through then the Democrats will absolutely retaliate by increasing the number of justices.

It's a messy situation that will now become part of the political drama surrounding Trump.

I don't think the Republican senate leader (McConnell) cares at all about any kind of fairness or decency in public life as highlighted by these two separate statements on the same topic:

The greatest ever crook in American politics. Disgraceful human being.

Dems would need to win the Senate to do this, and I'm not sure if Trump (if reelected) could block it?

Zzippy · 19-09-2020 5:01pm

Jaco, post some photos when you get back, sounds great!

ClanofLams · 19-09-2020 5:05pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

An incredible person, gifted intellect and an exceptional communicator.

After the Garland situation I think if a new candidate is forced through then the Democrats will absolutely retaliate by increasing the number of justices.

.

That and ending the filibuster will be their response I think.DC and Puerto Rico 51st and 52nd states makes sense also (regardless of what happens with court vacancy, this would go some ways towards levelling up the inherent disadvantage Democrats face in Senate).

awec · 20-09-2020 7:45am

Watching the NRL this morning, good grief rugby league is hard to watch.

It’s like 13 Jamie roberts on each team. Bosh bosh bosh.

Zzippy · 20-09-2020 11:11am

ClanofLams wrote: »

That and ending the filibuster will be their response I think.DC and Puerto Rico 51st and 52nd states makes sense also (regardless of what happens with court vacancy, this would go some ways towards levelling up the inherent disadvantage Democrats face in Senate).

is this being seriously considered, or just a suggestion? (adding states)
I can see the rationale for PR, but DC is just a city and adding it as a state would surely just be to pack the Senate, there really is no other compelling reason to make a city a state.

irishbucsfan · 20-09-2020 11:15am

Zzippy wrote: »

is this being seriously considered, or just a suggestion? (adding states)
I can see the rationale for PR, but DC is just a city and adding it as a state would surely just be to pack the Senate, there really is no other compelling reason to make a city a state.

There's nearly a million people in Washington DC who don't have a senator. They surely deserve to be represented in the senate?

Zzippy · 20-09-2020 11:23am

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There's nearly a million people in Washington DC who don't have a senator. They surely deserve to be represented in the senate?

For that few it would make more sense to give them a vote in the Maryland or Virginia elections and be represented by the senators for those states. A senator for a million people would be an outlier, even in the massively unrepresentative Senate.

Bazzo · 20-09-2020 3:59pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There's nearly a million people in Washington DC who don't have a senator. They surely deserve to be represented in the senate?

Of course not, relatively small populations only deserve senate representation if they're likely to vote republican :pac:

Zzippy wrote: »

For that few it would make more sense to give them a vote in the Maryland or Virginia elections and be represented by the senators for those states. A senator for a million people would be an outlier, even in the massively unrepresentative Senate.

Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, North + South Dakota would all have similar populations to DC

thomond2006 · 20-09-2020 9:39pm

The NFL was absolutely mad craic today.

errlloyd · 21-09-2020 10:19am

Zzippy wrote: »

is this being seriously considered, or just a suggestion? (adding states)
I can see the rationale for PR, but DC is just a city and adding it as a state would surely just be to pack the Senate, there really is no other compelling reason to make a city a state.

Making DC into a single state is definitely a questionable strategy.

Why stop at a simple senate majority when we can go for complete dominance and throw in enough state votes to amend the constitution as well. If we're gonna pack the union we should turn DC into at least 127 states.

Neil3030 · 21-09-2020 4:06pm

Dems have raised an incredible $100m since RBG's death.

To put that figure in context, Biden had been hoarding ~$300m for post-debate ads (be they damage limitation or otherwise!), so approx 1 month's TV budget.

The ads won't sway opinion as such, but that boosted spending power will have a huge effect on turnout.

Squidgy Black · 21-09-2020 6:25pm

thomond2006 wrote: »

The NFL was absolutely mad craic today.

As a chargers fan it was sickening to get that close and not clinch it, but Herbert looked decent, albeit one daft interception when he had a clear first down ahead of him.

swiwi_ · 22-09-2020 12:37pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Remember the rule on bears, Jaco:

if it's brown, lay down
if it's black, fight back
if it's white, good night

If it's brown, you're ok
If it's black, you've got malena
If it's white, obstructive jaundice

Zzippy · 22-09-2020 1:52pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

If it's brown, you're ok
If it's black, you've got malena
If it's white, obstructive jaundice

I *was* enjoying my lunch. Must remember to browse another site next time...

The Parish King · 22-09-2020 6:54pm

Howdy good people - I’m having issues with broadband speed that I’m hoping someone could help with!

We live in a somewhat rural area (about 45 mins from Dublin), and although there is an exchange installed within 1km that should be able to provide fibre speeds, the main players (Sky, Eir and Vodafone), are saying that the ports for the exchange are all in use so we can only get 12MB broadband.

This sounds mad to me and being permanently on hold is slowly killing me....but I’m just wondering if anyone has experienced this before and managed to get it resolved?

Squidgy Black · 22-09-2020 7:34pm

The Parish King wrote: »

Howdy good people - I’m having issues with broadband speed that I’m hoping someone could help with!

We live in a somewhat rural area (about 45 mins from Dublin), and although there is an exchange installed within 1km that should be able to provide fibre speeds, the main players (Sky, Eir and Vodafone), are saying that the ports for the exchange are all in use so we can only get 12MB broadband.

This sounds mad to me and being permanently on hold is slowly killing me....but I’m just wondering if anyone has experienced this before and managed to get it resolved?

I've seen it happen a few times before in the past, I used to work for one of the providers. There's basically nothing you can do but constantly check back in (Eir are probably your best bet to be honest), and wait and see if someone cancels and moves to Virgin. They won't add extra capacity to the cabinet unless there was large demand in the area for new ports.

Alternatively, is Virgin an option? They work off a different infrastructure so wouldn't be working off the same cabinet.

Zzippy · 22-09-2020 9:15pm

Virgin isn't available outside urban centres though.
I feel your pain TPK. We could get a port but we're so far away from the cabinet that it's worse than useless, so we rely on Vodafone 4G, whose speeds are ... not great and not reliable. The planned fibre upgrade under the NBP literally stops less than 200 metres away from us - in both directions.

The Parish King · 22-09-2020 9:43pm

Cheers guys, makes sense that the demand to upgrade the infrastructure isn’t viable - albeit frustrating for those just missing out!

We’re looking in to the alternative options like Vodafone who provide the broadband by satellite...not sure how much better the speed will be but worth investigating!

Neil3030 · 24-09-2020 3:28pm

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/24/close-to-100-accuracy-airport-enlists-sniffer-dogs-to-test-for-covid-19

Dogs: Immune to covid. Able to reliably sniff out the disease from sweat samples before people show symptoms. Happy to do it.
Cats: Susceptible to Covid and possibly spread it. Couldn't be arsed helping even if they could.

Let there be not even one further whisper of doubt - fu*k cats.

jacothelad · 24-09-2020 5:21pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/24/close-to-100-accuracy-airport-enlists-sniffer-dogs-to-test-for-covid-19

Dogs: Immune to covid. Able to reliably sniff out the disease from sweat samples before people show symptoms. Happy to do it.
Cats: Susceptible to Covid and possibly spread it. Couldn't be arsed helping even if they could.

Let there be not even one further whisper of doubt - fu*k cats.

There used ro be an elephant in Belfast Zoo that fu*ked cats. It used to stamp on them. They were totally fu*ked after that.....:D

Actually I like cats but wouldn't want to own one. Dogs have been a constant in my life for almost 70 years. I am in the North West Highlands doing a bit of climbing / hill walking and Buddy is struggling a bit. He is a big Lab and while he still looks great he is almost 11. We have had a fabulous morning in Torridon on an easy ridge / hill but I think we are now retired. I have to admit I prefer the company of dogs to most humans. It is hard to face this but at my age, 71, Buddy will most likely be my last companion. I just can't imagine life without a Labrador by my side.

Neil3030 · 24-09-2020 5:42pm

jacothelad wrote: »

There used ro be an elephant in Belfast Zoo that fu*ked cats. It used to stamp on them. They were totally fu*ked after that.....:D

Actually I like cats but wouldn't want to own one. Dogs have been a constant in my life for almost 70 years. I am in the North West Highlands doing a bit of climbing / hill walking and Buddy is struggling a bit. He is a big Lab and while he still looks great he is almost 11. We have had a fabulous morning in Torridon on an easy ridge / hill but I think we are now retired. I have to admit I prefer the company of dogs to most humans. It is hard to face this but at my age, 71, Buddy will most likely be my last companion. I just can't imagine life without a Labrador by my side.

Thank the redeemer this ended up metaphorical....

thomond2006 · 24-09-2020 7:10pm

We do not deserve dogs and never will.

Zzippy · 25-09-2020 10:03am

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/what-if-trump-refuses-concede/616424/

A long but fascinating read about the possible outcomes in the US election. I'm less optimistic about a Biden win after reading it.

kuang1 · 25-09-2020 10:12am

Zzippy wrote: »

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/what-if-trump-refuses-concede/616424/

A long but fascinating read about the possible outcomes in the US election. I'm less optimistic about a Biden win after reading it.

Haven't read this yet, but if Trump wins by appointment 35 days after the election (and right now this is a very realistic possibility), then we'll probably find out what a 21st century civil war in the west looks like.

Zzippy · 25-09-2020 11:22am

kuang1 wrote: »

Haven't read this yet, but if Trump wins by appointment 35 days after the election (and right now this is a very realistic possibility), then we'll probably find out what a 21st century civil war in the west looks like.

It would be very one-sided. Trump would control the government and the military. He would have a majority conservative Supreme Court backing his legitimacy. Most of the private citizens with guns are on his side. The states have no military resources save a few police units, who let's face it, aren't going to fight a civil war against what many will see as their own legitimate president. You could see states declaring independence and/or forming an alliance to create a new country, which is leaving the country rather than starting a civil war, but would citizens of those states actually vote to leave the US, if it came down to it?

25-09-2020 11:35am

Zzippy wrote: »

It would be very one-sided. Trump would control the government and the military. He would have a majority conservative Supreme Court backing his legitimacy. Most of the private citizens with guns are on his side. The states have no military resources save a few police units, who let's face it, aren't going to fight a civil war against what many will see as their own legitimate president. You could see states declaring independence and/or forming an alliance to create a new country, which is leaving the country rather than starting a civil war, but would citizens of those states actually vote to leave the US, if it came down to it?

I don't think you can say for certain that Trump would have the military. He has called on them recently and been denied.

I don't see states leaving or forming a new country, but I can absolutely see state on state sanctions and serious criminal charges from Democrat controlled states against members of the federal government.

It's very close to being broken though - quite a worrying and unpredictable time. If Biden does win I think he's going to have to make constitutional reform a major focus.

kuang1 · 25-09-2020 12:19pm

If it was at all possible, Biden should try to address and disband the electoral college.

I assume that that might be on a par with disbanding the Catholic Church though.

Paul Smeenus · 25-09-2020 12:33pm

For all the "checks and balances" rhetoric, it seems nigh-on impossible for Trump to be held to account.

Neil3030 · 25-09-2020 12:56pm

Trump does not have the military on his side.

Look at the yahoos he sent into Portland, mostly prison guards and border police.

Zzippy · 25-09-2020 1:19pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Trump does not have the military on his side.

Look at the yahoos he sent into Portland, mostly prison guards and border police.

I was responding to the suggested possibility of civil war. The president would have to invoke the insurrection act (IIRC) in order to use the military on US soil against US citizens. He couldn't do that for a riot in Portland. There was never any serious possibility of the military being used there.
In the case of actual civil war, he undoubtedly would. Assuming the supreme court have backed him, and he has been sworn in again, the military would certainly do their duty and carry out orders assigned to them by the "legitimate" president.

Neil3030 · 25-09-2020 3:17pm

Zzippy wrote: »

I was responding to the suggested possibility of civil war. The president would have to invoke the insurrection act (IIRC) in order to use the military on US soil against US citizens. He couldn't do that for a riot in Portland. There was never any serious possibility of the military being used there.
In the case of actual civil war, he undoubtedly would. Assuming the supreme court have backed him, and he has been sworn in again, the military would certainly do their duty and carry out orders assigned to them by the "legitimate" president.

Very unlikely you'll have both conditions for a civil war and a President that was cleanly decided by SCOTUS. As that article points out, the most concerning constitutional situation for this election will be congressional, resulting from rival slates of EC electors in one or more states, and how various congressional arms (Senate, HOR, VP, Speaker, etc) interpret the Electroal Count Act when counting the votes. There could be three people (Biden, Trump, Pelosi) with a plausible claim to the White House.

In such a scenario, I don't see the Pentagon siding with the incumbent.

swiwi_ · 25-09-2020 4:34pm

It is 1973. Roe vs Wade and abortion is made illegal. Fast forward to 2020 and Joe Biden is US president. In the upcoming election, Donald Trump might prevail. Supreme Court justice "Madame Conservative" has just passed away. The supreme court currently has a slight liberal advantage. With Biden in power, and democratic control of the senate, Biden has the chance to appoint another liberal justice, with an eye to reversing Roe vs Wade, and allowing abortion.

But it doesn't happen. Because democrats are universally principled to a man (and woman). The ends never justifies the means. So Biden states that it's too close to an election, and that the decision should await until after the election. Trump narrowly wins, appoints a conservative justice, and abortion remains illegal.

That's how it goes, right?

Neil3030 · 25-09-2020 4:42pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

It is 1973. Roe vs Wade and abortion is made illegal. Fast forward to 2020 and Joe Biden is US president. In the upcoming election, Donald Trump might prevail. Supreme Court justice "Madame Conservative" has just passed away. The supreme court currently has a slight liberal advantage. With Biden in power, and democratic control of the senate, Biden has the chance to appoint another liberal justice, with an eye to reversing Roe vs Wade, and allowing abortion.

But it doesn't happen. Because democrats are universally principled to a man (and woman). The ends never justifies the means. So Biden states that it's too close to an election, and that the decision should await until after the election. Trump narrowly wins, appoints a conservative justice, and abortion remains illegal.

That's how it goes, right?

The hypothetical does not offset the empirical.

Neil3030 · 27-09-2020 12:09am

It's the most wonderful tiiiiime of the yeeeearrrr

That's right, FAT BEAR WEEK 2020.

Biggest shock entrant this year is the CUB of Holly (last year's champ), and my oh my is it a chubby little tyke. Mother is inflating nicely herself, and could meet her cub in the semi final.

On the other side of the bracket you have the GOAT, the people's champ, 1438lbs of Alaskan LEGEND that is 747. Whether he meets Holly or Jr in the final, it would be his third year on the row; can the ursine Clermont finally have his year?

EiyammaWoAASx7i?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

EiyammaWoAASx7i?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Bazzo · 27-09-2020 9:33am

Anyone familiar with Ian O'Doherty? Heard him on the radio the other day and he seems like an almighty tool.

kuang1 · 27-09-2020 10:19am

Bazzo wrote: »

Anyone familiar with Ian O'Doherty? Heard him on the radio the other day and he seems like an almighty tool.

Haven't heard him in ages, but yeah he's been around a long time.
Contraversial for the sake of his career is how I'd describe him.

Only distinct thing I remember from his opinions is that he has a serious distaste of kids in general.

And is strongly against tipping!

thomond2006 · 27-09-2020 11:06am

Bazzo wrote: »

Anyone familiar with Ian O'Doherty? Heard him on the radio the other day and he seems like an almighty tool.

He's Gemma-lite. Angry and bitter.

Bazzo · 27-09-2020 9:04pm

kuang1 wrote: »

Haven't heard him in ages, but yeah he's been around a long time.
Contraversial for the sake of his career is how I'd describe him.

Only distinct thing I remember from his opinions is that he has a serious distaste of kids in general.

And is strongly against tipping!

thomond2006 wrote: »

He's Gemma-lite. Angry and bitter.

Haha yep, have had a Google since. Absolute muppet. I know there's a sense of journalistic balance to be met but I really dislike fools like that being given oxygen.

stephen_n · 27-09-2020 9:38pm

thomond2006 wrote: »

He's Gemma-lite. Angry and bitter.

George hook-lite would probably be more accurate.

thomond2006 · 27-09-2020 10:00pm

stephen_n wrote: »

George hook-lite would probably be more accurate.

Yeah, fair.

I would have said IOD was much worse than Hook until Hook starting speaking at Ir*xit events...

Neil3030 · 27-09-2020 10:38pm

Nah he was the poor man's Myers. A pseudo contrarian who couldn't hide that his motivations were grounded in a seething misanthropy.

Hook is so clownish I don't think he really expects to be taken seriously.

And Gemma O'D is very much in the modern social media age of overt populist sh*t stirrer.

Now can we please go back to the bears?

thomond2006 · 27-09-2020 11:24pm

We can Neil.

The Chicago Bears are 3-0. BEAR DOWN!

Dave_The_Sheep · 27-09-2020 11:30pm

thomond2006 wrote: »

... until Hook starting speaking at Ir*xit events...

What, seriously? Ah man.

Bazzo · 28-09-2020 12:37am

So Trump's tax returns finally leaked(conveniently timed..)

They're certainly interesting.

Neil3030 · 28-09-2020 12:55am

thomond2006 wrote: »

We can Neil.

The Chicago Bears are 3-0. BEAR DOWN!

747 would be a good addition to their O-line.

Neil3030 · 28-09-2020 1:00am

Bazzo wrote: »

So Trump's tax returns finally leaked(conveniently timed..)

They're certainly interesting.

With the Apprentice cash now dried up, it looks like the hearing into the potentially dodgy ~$70m refund in 2009 could end up bankrupting him.

Bazzo · 28-09-2020 7:40am

Neil3030 wrote: »

With the Apprentice cash now dried up, it looks like the hearing into the potentially dodgy ~$70m refund in 2009 could end up bankrupting him.

Well, two possibilities. Either his tax returns are accurate and the money he scams from the government to house the secret service in his hotels is barely keeping the lights on or else he is the biggest tax cheat in history. No idea what's true to be honest

He also has hundreds of millions of debt coming due in the next few years, and is apparently on the hook for hundreds of millions of personal debt.

Really you would think a reasonable electorate would look at this and say "Jesus, he's unelectable" but this is the latest in a long long list of things that make him completely unelectable so I doubt they'll give a ****.

Buer · 28-09-2020 8:35am

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

What, seriously? Ah man.

Indeed. Hook is the ideal target for such a movement. They're using him to deliver the message but also as a pawn. He's cantankerous and hankers for a bygone era which was actually totally sh*te. He's also not really at the height of his mental faculties. The leaders could easily manipulate him into alignging his thoughts with theirs.

molloyjh · 28-09-2020 12:05pm

The Trump taxes are bizarre. Theres definitely a lot of shady stuff going on with the expenses being claimed and almost certainly illegalities in there. But the bulk of what it contains seems legal, albeit entirely morally bankrupt. He's essentially deliberately losing money in a load of business so that he can claim those losses against his income tax and using legislation intended to help struggling businesses to further reduce the money he needs to pay the Gov.

Theres a lot of, on the surface of it, very shrewd accounting going on. But below the surface is the knife edge he seems to be sitting on all the time. But he can just file for bankruptcy again anyway if things go pear shaped for him.

At this stage the election has been decided, we just need to await the outcome. That he is still electable in any way after everything, including over 200k dead from C19, then his taxes aren't going to make a dent in anything. As Buer says, he is completely unelectable yet is still in the race. Its just bizarre, but thats not going to change in the next couple of months.

Neil3030 · 28-09-2020 1:59pm

They certainly show that his image is orders of magnitude beyond his means, but no real smoking gun.

His base will be convinced on two points - (1) that these returns show he has made billions of dollars (which he has, mostly from The Apprentice and related imaging) and (2) that he reinvests his fortune to restore properties and create employment. Would you rather his money went to Democrats who would give it all to illegals, etc etc.

Off Topic Thread 5.0

Comments