Politics & Stuff

[cosmicway 1,323]

This is how the human body works in the area of sexual sexuality,
Nothing more and nothing less.
In the eyes of the Catholic church I am a sinner for liaising with milfs but not so much as with gay sex.
It is a matter of grade.
One billion years in the purgatory instead of one trillion.
I 'm going to sleep it out, no problems.
But no, my genes had nothing to do with it.
We decent from Roman legionnaires is the family tradition but the records have been lost when Rome was sacked by the Goths.

[Fulham Broadway 16,854]

 Alon Pinkas, an ex-Israeli diplomat, told Jerusalem Post that Netanyahu “has been running rings around Biden”. “The Biden administration seems to be saying, ‘We’re suffering from a bit of autumn damp.’ No, this isn’t seasonal damp, it’s Netanyahu urinating all over you,” he said.

[NikkiCFC 7,953]

4 hours ago, cosmicway said:

Look, I 'm not gay but I have the following experience.
I was introduced to a milf, somewhere in Piraeus city.
Not a convent nun by profession.
So I go there and we have wild sex.
After that I get up to walk out and she says "shhhhh - move quietly - the neighbours".
I do that and I put my hand on the doorknob to open it.
But she had locked the door.
She says "oh dearie, let me unlock" and approaches me from behind.
Then with one hand she unlocks the door and with the other hand she puts her finger up right my *ss.
Now that was a hard on. I nearly turned back to say "let's go have another one".
This proves to you something then.
I don't know what happened to her.
Maybe she goes to church now passing the eucharist bread.

This is before you got married or after?

[cosmicway 1,323]

36 minutes ago, NikkiCFC said:

This is before you got married or after?

Sometime.

[Vesper 28,827]

Netanyahu mulls plan to empty northern Gaza of civilians and cut off aid to those left inside

https://apnews.com/article/hamas-israel-generals-plan-eiland-gaza-219d7eb9a3050e281ccc032d5a56263c

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is examining a plan to seal off humanitarian aid to northern Gaza in an attempt to starve out Hamas militants, a plan that, if implemented, could trap without food or water hundreds of thousands of Palestinians unwilling or unable to leave their homes.

Israel has issued many evacuation orders for the north throughout the yearlong war, the most recent of which was Sunday. The plan proposed to Netanyahu and the Israeli parliament by a group of retired generals would escalate the pressure, giving Palestinians a week to leave the northern third of the Gaza Strip, including Gaza City, before declaring it a closed military zone.

Those who remain would be considered combatants — meaning military regulations would allow troops to kill them — and denied food, water, medicine and fuel, according to a copy of the plan given to The Associated Press by its chief architect, who says the plan is the only way to break Hamas in the north and pressure it to release the remaining hostages.

The plan calls for Israel to maintain control over the north for an indefinite period to attempt to create a new administration without Hamas, splitting the Gaza Strip in two.

There has been no decision by the government to fully carry out the so-called “Generals’ Plan,” and it is unclear how strongly it’s being considered.

When asked if the evacuation orders in northern Gaza marked the first stages of the “Generals’ Plan,” Israeli military spokesperson Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani said no.

“We have not received a plan like that,” he added.

But one official with knowledge of the matter said parts of the plan are already being implemented, without specifying which parts. A second official, who is Israeli, said Netanyahu “had read and studied” the plan, “like many plans that have reached him throughout the war,” but didn’t say whether any of it had been adopted. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, because the plan isn’t supposed to be discussed publicly.

On Sunday, Israel launched an offensive against Hamas fighters in the Jabaliya refugee camp north of the city. No trucks of food, water or medicine have entered the north since Sept. 30, according to the U.N. and the website of the Israeli military agency overseeing humanitarian aid crossings.

The U.S. State Department spokesperson has said Washington is against any plan that would bring direct Israeli occupation in Gaza.

Human rights groups fear the plan’s potential toll on civilians

Human rights groups say the plan would likely starve civilians and that it flies in the face of international law, which prohibits using food as a weapon and forcible transfers. Accusations that Israel is intentionally limiting food to Gaza are central to the genocide case brought against it at the International Court of Justice, charges Israel denies.

So far, very few Palestinians have heeded the latest evacuation order. Some are older, sick or afraid to leave their homes, but many fear there’s nowhere safe to go and that they will never be allowed back. Israel has prevented those who fled earlier in the war from returning.

“All Gazans are afraid of the plan,” said Jomana Elkhalili, a 26-year-old Palestinian aid worker for Oxfam living in Gaza City with her family.

“Still, they will not flee. They will not make the mistake again ... We know the place there is not safe,” she said, referring to southern Gaza, where most of the population is huddled in dismal tent camps and airstrikes often hit shelters. “That’s why people in the north say it’s better to die than to leave.”

The plan has emerged as Hamas has shown enduring strength, firing rockets into Tel Aviv and regrouping in areas after Israeli troops withdraw, bringing repeated offensives.

After a year of devastating war with Hamas, Israel has far fewer ground troops in Gaza than it did a few months ago and in recent weeks has turned its attention to Hezbollah, launching an invasion of southern Lebanon. There is no sign of progress on a cease-fire in either front.

Israel’s offensive on the strip has killed more than 42,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which doesn’t distinguish between civilians and combatants, but says more than half of the dead are women and children.

People in northern Gaza could be forced to ‘surrender or starve’

The Generals’ Plan was presented to the parliament last month by a group of retired generals and high-ranking officers, according to publicly available minutes. Since then, officials from the prime minister’s office called seeking more details, according to its chief architect, Giora Eiland, a former head of the National Security Council.

Israeli media reported that Netanyahu told a closed parliamentary defense committee session that he was considering the plan.

Eiland said the only way to stop Hamas and bring an end to the yearlong war is to prevent its access to aid.

“They will either have to surrender or to starve,” Eiland said. “It doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re going to kill every person,” he said. “It will not be necessary. People will not be able to live there (the north). The water will dry up.”

He believes the siege could force Hamas to release some 100 Israeli hostages still being held by the group since its Oct. 7 attack that triggered Israel’s campaign. At least 30 of the hostages are presumed dead.

Human rights groups are appalled.

“I’m most concerned by how the plan seems to say that if the population is given a chance to evacuate and they don’t, then somehow they all turn into legitimate military targets, which is absolutely not the case,” said Tania Hary, executive director of Gisha, an Israeli organization dedicated to protecting Palestinians’ right to move freely within Gaza.

The copy of the plan shared with the AP says that if the strategy is successful in northern Gaza, it could then be replicated in other areas, including tent camps further to the south sheltering hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

When asked about the plan Wednesday, U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said the U.S. was going to “make absolutely clear that it’s not just the United States that opposes any occupation of Gaza, any reduction in the size of Gaza, but it is the virtual unanimous opinion of the international community.”

In northern Gaza, aid has dried up and people are trapped

The north, including Gaza City, was the initial target of Israel’s ground offensive early in the war, when it first ordered everyone there to leave. Entire neighborhoods have been reduced to rubble since then.

A senior U.N. official said that no aid, except for one small shipment of fuel for hospitals, has entered the north since Sept. 30, whether through crossings from Israel or from southern Gaza. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential information.

COGAT, the Israeli body facilitating aid crossings into Gaza, denied that crossings to the north have been closed, but didn’t respond when asked how many trucks have entered in recent days.

The U.N. official said that only about 100 Palestinians have fled the north since Sunday.

“At least 400,000 people are trapped in the area,” Philippe Lazzarini, head of the U.N.’s agency for Palestinian refugees, wrote on X Thursday. “With almost no basic supplies available, hunger is spreading.”

Troops have already cut off roads between Gaza City and areas further north, making it difficult for people to flee, said two doctors in the far north — Mohammed Salha, director of al-Awda Hospital, and Dr. Rana Soloh, at Kamal Adwan Hospital.

“North Gaza is now divided into two parts,” Soloh said. “There are checkpoints and inspections, and not everyone can cross easily.” ___

 

Edited October 14 by Vesper

[Vesper 28,827]

[Vesper 28,827]

'Dead heat': Trump pulls even with Harris in NBC News poll (a video is also at the link)

A close election has never looked more tightly divided, with Harris’ popularity declining from its previous high and abortion atop voters’ issue list.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/dead-heat-trump-pulls-even-harris-nbc-news-poll-rcna174201

 

Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are deadlocked in the latest national NBC News poll, with Trump bolstered by Republicans coming back home to support him after last month’s rough debate and a subsequent polling deficit, as well as by a favorable voter assessment of Trump’s term as president.

These are among the findings of a new survey released three weeks before Election Day, which also shows Harris’ popularity declining compared to a month ago, after she got a big summertime boost; a massive gender gap between support for Harris and Trump; and voters viewing abortion as a top motivating issue heading into the 2024 vote.

“As summer has turned to fall, any signs of momentum for Kamala Harris have stopped,” said Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff. “The race is a dead heat.”

McInturff said “headwinds” for Harris have helped narrow the presidential contest, including concerns that the vice president doesn’t represent change from President Joe Biden and voters seeing Trump’s presidency in a more positive light than Biden’s.

“She is asking for another term from the incumbent party,” McInturff said of Harris.

Still, underlining the poll is uncertainty about the election (with 10% of voters saying they might change their minds and a sliver of unclaimed voters still on the fence), an all-time-high share of voters believing that this presidential election will make “a great deal of difference” in their lives, and key challenges for both Harris and Trump. The third-party vote could play a role, too — Trump gets a small boost when third-party candidates are included in the ballot test, to a 1-point edge.

And in a finely balanced election, even small changes in turnout among different groups could be the difference between a win and a loss for either party.

“The challenge for Kamala Harris: Can she meet the moment and fill in the blanks that voters have about her?” asked Horwitt, the Democratic pollster.

“The challenge for Donald Trump: Can he make the case that the chaos and personal behavior that bothered so many about his first term will not get in the way of governing and representing America?” he added.

“The next month will tell whether the candidates can meet these challenges,” Horwitt said.

In the new poll — which was conducted Oct. 4-8 — Harris gets support from 48% of registered voters in a head-to-head matchup, while Trump gets an identical 48%. Another 4% say they are undecided or wouldn’t vote for either option when forced to choose between those two major-party candidates.

(Read more here from NBC News’ pollsters on why this poll measures registered voters and not likely voters.)

That’s a change from September’s NBC News poll, which found Harris leading Trump by 5 points, 49%-44%, though that result was within the margin of error.

An expanded ballot including third-party candidates also shows this shift, with 47% of registered voters in the new poll picking Trump, 46% supporting Harris and a combined 7% picking other candidates or saying they’re undecided.

In September, however, Harris held a 6-point lead on this expanded ballot.

Given that close elections are often decided by which party better turns out its voters, the NBC News poll provides a snapshot of what could happen depending on different turnout scenarios.

Assuming a more favorable environment for Republicans — which means slightly greater turnout among men, white voters and voters without college degrees — Trump leads Harris by 2 points, 49%-47%.

But assuming a more favorable turnout environment for Democrats — which means more women, more white voters with college degrees and more voters of color showing up to the polls — these survey results show Harris leading Trump by 3 points among registered voters, 49%-46%.

All of these results are within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

(Read here for an in-depth breakdown of these different turnout scenarios and how they would affect the election.)

A massive gender gap

At 48%-48%, the survey results are as close as possible. But among different groups, there are enormous variations in candidate support.

The poll finds Harris with her biggest advantages over Trump among Black voters (84%-11%), younger voters ages 18 to 34 (57%-37%) and white voters with college degrees (55%-41%).

Trump, meanwhile, leads among rural voters (75%-23%), white voters (56%-42%) and whites without college degrees (65%-33%).

Yet what also stands out as one of the defining features of the election is a massive gender gap between Harris and Trump, with women supporting Harris by a 14-point margin (55%-41%) and men backing Trump by 16-points (56%-40%).

Independent voters are essentially split in the poll, with Harris getting support from 44% of them versus 40% choosing Trump. Compared to other groups, there are more independents who have yet to choose between Harris and Trump — or who say they don’t want to pick either of them.

Harris’ popularity declines

Another significant change in the NBC News poll since September is Harris’ popularity.

One of the major developments in September’s NBC News poll, conducted after the Harris-Trump debate on Sept. 10, was her double-digit increase in popularity compared to earlier in the summer, before she became Democrats’ presidential candidate. Her ratings shot upward to 48% positive, 45% negative (a +3 net rating).

But in this latest poll, Harris’ rating stands at 43% positive, 49% negative (-6), with the erosion coming mainly from independents and young voters.

snip

Abortion is the top motivating issue — and the best issue for Harris

While most public polls, including September’s national NBC News poll, find the cost of living ranking as voters’ top concern, this survey asked a different question to get at voter intensity and motivation heading into Election Day: Is there one issue you feel so strongly about that you will vote for or against a candidate solely on that issue?

The top responses, with multiple allowed: abortion (22%), immigration/border security (19%), protecting democracy or constitutional rights (18%) and cost of living (16%).

snip 

 

Edited October 14 by Vesper

[Vesper 28,827]

oh ffs!

is fucking Biden trying to sabo Harris???

fucking hardcore RW zionists once again with the whiphand over the yanks, no matter if it is the the Repubs or the Dems are in charge

 

President Biden has announced that the US will send military troops and an advanced anti-missile system “to help bolster Israel’s defences”

https://www.thetimes.com/world/israel-hamas-war/article/israel-un-peacekeepers-lebanon-netanyahu-idf-88z9grcxb

Binyamin Netanyahu at the UN in New York in September. He has vowed to retaliate against Iran for its barrage of ballistic missiles a fortnight ago

EDUARDO MUNOZ/REUTERS

 

President Biden has announced that the US will send troops to “defend Israel” against Iran.

Soon afterwards, Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy militia in Lebanon, killed four soldiers and injured more than 60 people in a surprise drone attack on a military base in central Israel.

The Pentagon said on Sunday that up to 100 American soldiers would be sent to operate a ground-based Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (Thaad) interceptor system, designed to shoot down ballistic missiles.

The region remains braced for Israel’s retaliation after Iran launched a barrage of 200 ballistic missiles at targets around the country earlier this month. Almost all were intercepted.

“This action underscores the United States’ ironclad commitment to the defence of Israel, and to defend Americans in Israel from any further ballistic missile attacks by Iran,” Major General Pat Ryder, the Pentagon press secretary, said.

The Thaad system is considered complementary to the Patriot missile defence system but can defend a wider area, hitting targets up to 125 miles away. It is capable of shooting down up to 72 incoming ballistic missiles.

The Biden administration has been consulting Israel on how it plans to respond to Iran’s missile attack. On Wednesday, Biden held his first conversation with Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, for nearly two months, and told him that any retaliation should be proportionate. US officials have made clear they do not want Israel to target Iranian nuclear sites or oilfields.

Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, said: “The US has been delivering a record amount of arms to Israel. It is now also putting the lives of its troops at risk by deploying them to operate US missile systems in Israel.

“While we have made tremendous efforts in recent days to contain an all-out war in our region, I say it clearly that we have no red lines in defending our people and interests.”

Binyamina, a town in the Haifa area of central Israel, was hit by drones soon after the US announcement. Dozens were wounded, some of them critically. It was one of the most serious air attacks by militants in more than a year of conflict.

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) confirmed that four people died from the drone strike with the country’s ambulance service declaring it a mass casualty event.

Hezbollah claimed a “swarm of drones” had attacked a camp of the Golani Brigade, an Israeli division undertaking cross-border operations into Lebanon. Israeli media reported that two drones were launched from Lebanon and the military said one was intercepted.

Reports suggested that Herzi Halevi, the IDF’s chief of staff, was the target and was at the base on Sunday night. It was believed there were no sirens to warn of the incoming drones, which appear to have eluded Israel’s defence system.

Hezbollah said that the strike was in retaliation for two Israeli strikes on Beirut which killed 22 people on Thursday.

The militant group added that, as part of a “qualitative and complex operation”, it launched dozens of missiles towards various targets in Israel with the aim of overwhelming its generally reliable air defence systems. “At the same time, the air force of the Islamic Resistance launched squadrons of various drones towards various areas in Acre and Haifa,” Hezbollah added.

Earlier on Sunday, Israel was accused of “shocking violations” against United Nations soldiers deployed in Lebanon after Israeli tanks entered a peacekeeping base then inundated it with smoke, requiring troops to seek medical treatment.

UN peacekeepers based on the Lebanon border have come under pressure from Israel to leave the area OLIVER MARSDEN

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (Unifil), made the allegations after another incident involving Israeli forces and UN troops, also on Sunday. Peacekeepers at a UN position in Ramyah, a border village in southern Lebanon, observed three platoons of IDF soldiers crossing the “blue line” into Lebanon, Unifil said.

“At around 4.30am, while peacekeepers were in shelters, two IDF Merkava tanks destroyed the position’s main gate and forcibly entered the position,” the statement added. “They requested multiple times that the base turn out its lights. The tanks left about 45 minutes later after Unifil protested through our liaison mechanism, saying that IDF presence was putting peacekeepers in danger.

“At around 6.40am peacekeepers at the same position reported the firing of several rounds 100 metres north, which emitted smoke. Despite putting on protective masks, 15 peacekeepers suffered effects including skin irritation and gastrointestinal reactions, after the smoke entered the camp. The peacekeepers are receiving treatment.”

The force said that it had reported additional Israeli violations against its positions in the country, including what it described as the forcible entry of Israeli tanks through its main gate on Sunday. It also accused IDF soldiers of blocking a UN logistics convoy in southern Lebanon on Saturday and denying it passage.

“For the fourth time in as many days, we remind the IDF and all actors of their obligations to ensure the safety and security of UN personnel and property and to respect the inviolability of UN premises at all times,” the Unifil statement added. “We have requested an explanation from the IDF from these shocking violations.”

The Israeli military said in a statement: “An initial review showed that an IDF tank that was trying to evacuate injured soldiers while still under fire backed several metres into a Unifil post. Once the enemy fire stopped, and following the evacuation of the injured soldiers, the tank left the post.”

The statement from Unifil came hours after Netanyahu told the UN to evacuate the peacekeeping troops from southern Lebanon “immediately”, saying they were acting as a “human shield” to Hezbollah fighters.

In a direct address on Sunday to António Guterres, the UN secretary-general, Netanyahu warned that troops of Unifil should be removed from “harm’s way”. “It is time for you to withdraw Unifil from Hezbollah strongholds and from the areas of combat,” Netanyahu said.

“The IDF has repeatedly asked for this, and has been met with repeated refusals, all aimed at providing a human shield to Hezbollah terrorists. Mr Secretary-General, get the Unifil forces out of harm’s way. It should be done right now, immediately.”

Netanyahu added: “Your refusal to evacuate the Unifil soldiers makes them hostages of Hezbollah. This endangers both them and the lives of our soldiers.”

A soldier from Unifil’s Italian battalion watches the border of southern Lebanon

OLIVER MARSDEN

It is the most explicit warning yet from Netanyahu, who has been calling for days for UN troops to leave their posts in southern Lebanon. The UN secretary-general later said that the attacks against peacekeepers “may constitute a war crime” and are “in breach of international law”.

Israel said it invaded Lebanon at the beginning of the month to eliminate the threat from Hezbollah. The Iranian-backed group has been firing rockets at Israel since the outbreak of war in Gaza that began with the Hamas attacks of October 7 last year.

In recent days, five members of the peacekeeping force have been wounded by Israeli fire. Unifil has refused to leave its positions.

“There was a unanimous decision to stay because it’s important for the UN flag to still fly high in this region, and to be able to report to the Security Council,” the Unifil spokesman Andrea Tenenti told the news agency Agence France-Presse this weekend.

Tenenti added that Israel had previously asked Unifil to withdraw from positions “up to 5km from the blue line” separating both countries, but the request was refused. Unifil has a mission of 10,000 troops stationed close to the border between the two countries. It monitors a ceasefire that ended a 33-day war in 2006 between Israel and Hezbollah. Some 50 nations contribute to the peacekeeping force.

A spokesman for Sir Keir Starmer said the UK was “appalled” by the reports of attacks on peacekeepers”.

In a joint statement on Friday, Unifil said it strongly condemned the recent attacks on its forces. “Such actions must stop immediately and should be adequately investigated,” said the statement, posted on X. Unifil has previously accused the Israeli military of “deliberately” firing on its positions. Italy, which has troops among the contingent, said the attacks could be considered a “war crime”.

Giorgia Meloni, the prime minister of Italy, spoke on Sunday to Netanyahu by phone and said that Israeli attacks on UN peacekeepers in Lebanon were unacceptable, according to a statement by the Italian government.

Ireland, which has almost 380 troops on the force, said that Israeli actions represented a “breach of international law”.

On Sunday, Pope Francis, speaking at the Vatican, called for “respect” for the UN peacekeepers.

The Unifil issue is the latest dispute between Israel and the UN. This month Israel’s foreign minister, Israel Katz, declared Guterres persona non grata and said he was an “anti-Israel secretary-general” over the UN leader’s response to Iran’s latest missile attack on Israel. He reinforced this on Sunday, posting on X that “Guterres can continue seeking support from UN member states, but the decision will not change”.

Lebanon’s prime minister, Najib Mikati, said he condemned Netanyahu’s call to remove the UN troops.

The Lebanese Health Ministry has said that 51 people died in airstrikes on Saturday, bringing the total since October 8, 2023 to 2,306.

Edited October 14 by Vesper

[robsblubot 3,504]

If Trump wins, which is looking likely given that his message on immigration resonates with people here, it would have little to do with Israel and a lot to with with Biden's senility, which has certainly not take hold overnight in a day in 2024. His inaction in the past 2 years regarding the election is very telling: presidents defending their term usually go ballistic, and the being the president offers some nice perks when campaigning.

Yes, Trump is sounding just like Biden these days, and he is too old for the job, but that does not change 👆

Biden's idea he would pass the "bi-partisan" immigration bill in an election year was cute.

The idea that the US would just not help Israel at this time sounds ridiculous tbh.

[Vesper 28,827]

Please prepare your miniature violins. My colleague Aubrey Allegretti has an eyebrow-raising story in this morning’s Times that about a tenth of the parliamentary Conservative party (that is, 12 MPs) are considering standing down because of Labour’s plans to clampdown on second jobs. “No one will want to step down too quickly after the ­general election or immediately cause a headache for the next Tory leader, but I’d expect the drip of resignations to start some time in the new year,” a senior source tells Aubrey.

New rules designed to crack down on MPs’ second jobs were passed by the Commons in July and come into force this month. Labour decided against a total ban on outside earnings but closed a “loophole” so that MPs are no longer allowed to advise businesses on public policy or how parliament works in general. And further clampdowns have been threatened. A cross-party group known as the “modernisation committee”, chaired by Lucy Powell, the leader of the Commons, will look at whether to bar MPs from presenting news or current affairs shows on television and put greater limits on raking in money from speeches. Considering MPs have been paid more than £250,000 for broadcast work over the past 18 months, and thousands more on speeches, it would be a big move.

Those who served in Rishi Sunak’s government and who were passed over for senior shadow cabinet roles are apparently most likely to quit. One former cabinet minister who has been offered a job in the United States told allies they are considering their position if they are not given a senior role under the next Tory leader. Another said they were “considering my next move outside parliament” having decided not to continue playing a frontline role. And a third former cabinet minister told colleagues they are “growing tired of the job” and “thinking about how much more they can make on the outside”. If you’re worried about the loss of such spirited public servants, do not fret. Some of those resigning are crossing their fingers they will make it onto Sunak’s resignation honours list, so they can carry on in parliament as a member of the House of Lords.

 

Tory MPs consider resigning over Labour’s second job crackdown
Senior party sources said that they expected ‘a drip of resignations’ to begin after the Conservative Party leadership contest

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/url-tory-mps-resign-next-general-election-lhjlhpjzx

[Fulham Broadway 16,854]

 

[Vesper 28,827]

10 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

 

the Israeli guards anally raped the Palestinian prisoner with objects for 10 plus minutes behind the riot shields they used to block the CCTV

sickening

[Vesper 28,827]

2 hours ago, robsblubot said:

If Trump wins, which is looking likely given that his message on immigration resonates with people here, it would have little to do with Israel and a lot to with with Biden's senility, which has certainly not take hold overnight in a day in 2024. His inaction in the past 2 years regarding the election is very telling: presidents defending their term usually go ballistic, and the being the president offers some nice perks when campaigning.

Yes, Trump is sounding just like Biden these days, and he is too old for the job, but that does not change 👆

Biden's idea he would pass the "bi-partisan" immigration bill in an election year was cute.

The idea that the US would just not help Israel at this time sounds ridiculous tbh.

Biden is not running, Harris is, as much as Trump and the MAGAts wish it were not so.

[Vesper 28,827]

What Austria’s election teaches us about the far right’s rise and migration fears

Austria’s election results highlight key lessons on the far right’s enduring appeal and the challenges of addressing voter concerns over migration.

https://www.socialeurope.eu/what-austrias-election-teaches-us-about-the-far-rights-rise-and-migration-fears

Two weeks after the federal elections in Austria, it is still unclear which parties will form the next government. The far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ), led by Herbert Kickl, clearly won the elections with almost 29%, but the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP), which gained 26%, excludes a coalition with them as long as Kickl is in play. Dropping the leader who achieved the best result in the party’s history hasn’t seemed to gain traction in the FPÖ so far. Hence, the ÖVP might decide instead to form a coalition with the social democrats (SPÖ), who came third with 21%, and probably include the fourth-placed liberal NEOS (9%) as well.

While standing closer to the FPÖ on key economic and migration policy issues, the ÖVP aligns better with the SPÖ and NEOS regarding the rule of law and foreign policy. Moreover, this would allow the ÖVP to assume the chancellorship rather than be the junior partner to the FPÖ. However, this broader option, the “coalition of the losers,” as Kickl puts it, promises no stability either: the German traffic light coalition of social democrats, liberals, and greens serves as a warning sign to all concerned parties about how difficult it would be in such a diverse coalition concerning crucial policy areas like the economy.

A few days ago in Social Europe, Robert Misik argued that it is up to the ÖVP and SPÖ (and NEOS) to push back against the far right by forming a coalition. While the situation in Hungary substantiates this worry, a cordon sanitaire around the winner may not be the right strategy—either democratically or tactically. Even less so, as the ÖVP never ruled out the option of forming a coalition with the FPÖ (minus Kickl) during the campaign, yet 26% decided to vote for them. This suggests that 55% of Austrian voters do not share the apocalyptic concerns related to an FPÖ in government and might feel betrayed by being told, “It’s nice that you used your democratic right, but you voted wrong.” Exclusion from the opportunity to form a government and the anticipated austerity politics in the coming years to address the budget deficit could further strengthen the far-right, enabling them to win even more support in the upcoming regional elections and in five years in the federal elections.

Karl Nehammer, the sitting chancellor and ÖVP chairman, signalled that the reluctance to form a coalition with Kickl is not due to the FPÖ’s issues. The ÖVP takes—Nehammer said on election night—the concerns of the almost 30% of voters who supported the FPÖ this time “seriously, very seriously.” It’s about the methods with which the populist Kickl wants to address the problems.

Arguably, the party is not that different from its leader, and in two of the three federal states where the FPÖ is a junior coalition partner to the ÖVP, Kickl’s closest allies are in the government. Therefore, an “FPÖ without Kickl” is neither politically nor ideologically realistic. It does not seem to have worked as a discursive strategy during the campaign, aimed at not alienating the Kickl-averse ÖVP voters and attracting non-radical FPÖ voters. However, for moving towards the SPÖ and NEOS, along the lines of accountability and presumed stability rather than being seen as a “security risk,” as Nehammer describes Kickl, this approach of “FPÖ yes, Kickl no” might now be a viable way forward.

The election results reveal that none of the contending parties managed to understand the motivations of FPÖ voters or to propose and credibly represent an alternative. This is not solely an Austrian issue; we have witnessed similar situations across various European countries in recent years, highlighting the helplessness of democratic elites in the face of the far-right surge. Much has been written on this topic, but I will focus on two puzzles left by these results that the Left may need to address in the coming years, both in Austria and beyond.

There needs to be more than a materialistic leftism.

The electoral results of the SPÖ must be bitter for the materialistic Left. The party failed to gain votes under Andreas Babler’s leadership compared to 2019 (losing 0.1 percentage point) and could attract almost no new votes from the FPÖ or non-voters. The current voter analysis shows that from the slightly more than 1 million votes the SPÖ gained, a mere 29,000 came from FPÖ voters since 2019 and 54,000 from non-voters while losing 65,000 to the FPÖ. Additionally, 180,000 of those who voted for them in 2019 abstained from voting in the federal elections 2024. Fifty per cent of workers voted for the FPÖ.

Babler was a credible candidate for a materialistic vision. Embedded in the trade unions and forged in labour struggles, he even admitted in an interview to being a Marxist. Far from being an orthodox Marxist who dismisses issues beyond labour as “stupid identity politics,” Babler managed to frame feminist, migration, and ecological causes in class terms, focusing on the issues of the less privileged and standing with the workers and disenfranchised, whether in production or healthcare. He proposed concrete ideas for redistribution, integration, and a socially just green transition. The social democrats who supported Babler hoped to redirect the anger and anxieties of FPÖ voters from “migrants” and the “Covid dictatorship” towards the “upper 2%.” While his flagship policy proposals—wealth tax and inheritance tax intended to affect the upper 2%—irritated economic elites, they did not seem to capture the political imagination of the lower classes or FPÖ voters and non-voters.

Arguably, his campaign was aided neither by the media, who had much to say about how politicians are portrayed, nor by his own party elites, who—during the campaign—publicly denounced his electoral programme as “unserious” through a leaked internal email. This portrayal depicted him as out of touch with the 21st century despite his accurate capture of the everyday struggles of workers. However, the events of the campaign’s last weeks do not explain why his programme failed to gain traction beyond his party base since his election as party leader in June 2023. In the short term, the challenge will be maintaining a leftist vision during coalition negotiations with the economically right-wing ÖVP and NEOS. In the medium term, the question will be whether the party elites from other factions will attempt to oust Babler. In the longer run, ideological and strategic questions will certainly resurface.

All of this will need to be analysed and contemplated in the coming years. Migration will surely be one element of these considerations.

“It’s the migration, stupid!”

To the frustration of an SPÖ that wanted to focus on issues of property, working conditions, inflation, and redistribution in the campaign, the main concern for voters was migration. According to polls before the campaign, 43% said migration and asylum were the most important problems politics should address. These issues entail social and cultural tensions that cannot be articulated solely in class terms.

The significance of the topic in Austria is not primarily driven by the media, but by its tangible presence in the everyday lives of Austrian voters: in 2022, the number of asylum applications tripled in Austria, reaching new heights since 2015; in 2023, family reunifications from Syria became more common; the proportion of immigrants who do not speak German by school age is a noticeable problem in public education; stabbings and gang wars increased in Vienna’s immigrant neighbourhoods; and just a few weeks ago, a terrorist attack was thwarted at a planned Taylor Swift concert, which was ultimately cancelled due to the threat. Events in neighbouring Germany also influence the public mood in Austria: at the end of August in Solingen, North Rhine-Westphalia, a man with rejected refugee status killed three people with a knife during a town feast; and in Munich at the beginning of September, an Austrian citizen of Bosnian origin prepared to fire shots near the Israeli consulate—in both cases, it involved radicalised young men linked to the Islamic State.

The above examples also show that many issues are intertwined in the complex topic of ‘migration’:

• The tensions created by illegal border crossings.
• Cultural barriers to the reception of refugees.
• The effects on the social welfare system, which by definition create tensions among those on the lower rungs of the social ladder .A related issue is what kind of social care refugees should be entitled to for Austria not to be, in Kickl’s formulation, a “refugee magnet.” 
• The chances of someone losing their life in a terrorist attack are statistically insignificant, but it is understandable if the attacks feed fear.

Issues of asylum, labour migration, integration, crime, Islamism, terrorism, and the distribution of social welfare are very different and complex concerns. They require caution, taking legitimate security concerns of the population seriously without oversimplifying problems and creating scapegoats. In fact, all FPÖ contenders took illegal migration and security questions seriously in the campaign, not depicting these topics as inherently right-wing or racist per se. However, the election results suggest that they failed to present themselves as capable of providing answers. Obviously, a party that proposes a simple “migration stop” might have it easier, but it is a difficult puzzle that still needs to be solved in the coming years.

Neither reframing societal conflicts and the election’s stakes in class terms nor a human rights-based inclusion versus exclusion framing seem to work when faced with the material reality of many people experiencing cultural and social tensions that cry out for efficient and sustainable solutions.

The columnist of the Austrian left-liberal weekly Falter, Ruşen Timur Aksak, formulated it succinctly after the elections:

“I have to ask myself whether the FPÖ’s political competitors – especially those on the left-of-centre – even want to recognise that the issues of migration, asylum, and Islamism are and will remain significant concerns for the population. In my desperation, I almost want to shout: “It’s the migration, stupid!” But then I see pictures of spontaneous anti-FPÖ demonstrations in Vienna and fear that the established forces in politics, society, and art will again be unwilling to learn from their failures.”

Pressuring for a firewall against extremists and protesting against a party or electoral results all seem to be blindfolded, self-reassuring or strategies that may serve the elite’s interests but are unlikely to convince voters to change their choices, as evidenced by the successes of the German AfD. On the contrary, these actions add fuel to the fire. If elites appear disconnected from the problems many parts of the electorate face, anti-elitist and anti-pluralist parties seem a viable option for them.If social democrats want to reverse this trend, they may need to more credibly engage with material reality, not only in class terms.

[Vesper 28,827]

How Trump may try to challenge the election results if he loses again

If Harris wins, election officials and experts worry Trump and his supporters will not accept that outcome.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/10/14/trump-2024-election-results/

If Vice President Kamala Harris wins in November, election officials and experts worry that former president Donald Trump and his supporters will not accept that outcome — and could again try to overturn his loss.

In 2020, Trump refused to acknowledge his loss, spread false claims about widespread fraudulent voting, sought to reverse the results in swing states and tried to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to help him stay in power as rioters raided the U.S. Capitol. Many of those strategies can’t be used again because Trump no longer occupies the White House, and state and federal officials have since tightened election laws and policies to make it harder to undermine the will of voters.

But vulnerabilities persist. The risks this year will depend on the particulars of the election — and the closeness of the results. Many election officials and experts are worried false narratives could again take off, eroding public trust and leading to chaos, confusion and, in a worst-case scenario, violence. David Becker, the executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, said that those who oversee elections in key states are once again bracing to be harassed and threatened for doing their jobs.

“This is not a hypothetical,” he said. “This is not fearmongering. This is what happened in 2020 and since, on a widespread scale.”

Trump has not committed to accepting the outcome of the upcoming election, no matter who wins, and he has already claimed without evidence that Democrats will cheat. He has also threatened to jail election officials and others “involved in unscrupulous behavior” related to voting.

Trump spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt in a statement did not directly answer whether Trump would honor the outcome as determined by election officials, saying only that he would “accept the results of a free and fair election.”

Here are some of the vulnerabilities that experts are most worried about:

Widespread false information

It could again take several days to declare a winner, as some swing states like Pennsylvania and Arizona take longer than others to count votes. As the public waits for results, false narratives could quickly spread.

Trump has a long history of blaming his electoral shortcomings on nonexistent voter fraud. In 2020, Trump falsely claimed victory on election night, even though full results weren’t known for days. He could do the same this year — and now misinformation and disinformation can spread even faster because of sophisticated artificial intelligence-generated content and a hands-off approach from social media platforms.

Weeks-long recounts

Recounts are likely to spring up if the results are close, and they could last for weeks, particularly if they get bogged down in lawsuits over whether officials followed proper procedures.

After Trump lost Wisconsin in 2020, he used a recount to try to throw out hundreds of thousands of ballots. The state Supreme Court rejected his arguments in a 4-3 decision. A fight in 2024 could again come down to one or more state high courts, including in battlegrounds like North Carolina and Arizona, where conservatives control the courts.

“We also don’t know how the threat landscape will morph,” said Norm Eisen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee for Trump’s first impeachment. “The way the litigation landscape looks [weeks before the election] is almost never the way it looks in November.”

Lawsuits that delay final results

Already Republicans and Democrats have filed dozens of lawsuits over how the 2024 election will be conducted. Many of them have been resolved, while others will get rulings in the coming weeks. Some litigation could persist beyond Election Day and influence how courts consider disputes that arise once votes begin to be tallied. In 2020, Trump or those who support him lost more than 60 lawsuits over the election.

Even if lawsuits fail, they can slow the process down and create the impression that the validity of the results are in doubt.

“If you inundate the system more than it can handle, you result in a kind of denial of service attack and you kind of shut the whole system down,” said Edward Foley, the director of the election law program at Ohio State University. “And our judicial system isn’t built for massive amounts of litigation around election results.”

Breakdown in certifying results

There is a tight timeline for determining a winner after election officials tally the results. Federal law requires states to certify their outcomes by Dec. 11. The presidential electors meet six days later, on Dec. 17, and send the results to Congress.

The new session of Congress begins on Jan. 3, and the House and Senate are to formalize the presidential results on Jan. 6 — the day the U.S. Capitol was attacked by Trump supporters four years ago. The next president will be inaugurated on Jan. 20.

Election experts are worried rogue local or state officials could refuse to certify their results and hamper the dispatch of electoral votes to Congress on time.

Trump supporters who might not accept the election results “will not be spending two months packing up their SUVs and driving to D.C. They are going to be focusing their efforts on county seats, county courthouses, little county voting centers in hundreds of places all over the country if Trump loses,” said Becker.

In recent elections, a small number of local officials have temporarily refused to certify results but have ultimately done so, often under court order. New rules in Georgia would make it easier to hold up certification, although experts say courts would probably intervene.

Election experts have fewer concerns about state legislatures trying to change a state’s electoral votes. Congress in 2022 passed the Electoral Count Reform Act, which bars states from changing how they appoint electors after the election and effectively prevents them from reversing the will of voters.

Disruptions at elector meetings

Once low-key affairs, the electoral college meetings in each state on Dec. 17 could draw protests. Some officials fear disruptions could prevent electors from voting and raise untested questions about how to tally the official results for each state.

A crucial part of Trump’s attempt to reverse the 2020 results involved having his supporters put themselves forward as presidential electors in key states that Joe Biden won. That plot failed, and prosecutions against would-be electors or those who helped them are ongoing in four states.

A similar effort could unfold in 2024 but it would be much harder to pull off. The Electoral Count Reform Act, passed in response to the attempt to overturn the results, sets a higher threshold for Congress to consider electoral votes that have been submitted by someone other than a governor. And those who pose as electors could face charges.

As vice president, Harris will preside over the deliberations of which electoral votes to count. That role will put her in a politically awkward position because she will have to preside over the final determination of the outcome. She would have a chance to thwart Republicans if they tried to improperly count electoral votes.

Congress stalls certification

When House members are sworn in on Jan. 3, their first task will be to elect a speaker. In 2023, it took four days and 15 votes to elect a speaker. Later that year, it took three weeks to choose a new leader. Congress would be in uncharted territory if it didn’t have a speaker by Jan. 6, when it must meet to certify the presidential results. The House can perform few functions without a speaker, according to historians, and in October 2023 was largely immobilized while members debated who should lead them.

A wild card

In 2020, Trump allies came up with their plan to have Republican electors meet in states that Biden won at the last minute. Its full scope didn’t become apparent until a year or more after the election. Similarly, this year something new could be tried that attorneys and election officials haven’t yet gamed out.

Edited October 14 by Vesper

[Fulham Broadway 16,854]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

the Israeli guards anally raped the Palestinian prisoner with objects for 10 plus minutes behind the riot shields they used to block the CCTV

sickening

Absolutely. They're murdering around 50-100 every day. Just looking at pictures of children sent to a 'safe zone' in Gaza - burnt to a crisp in their tents, the tent material seared into their skin. Brave Israeli pilots.

[Vesper 28,827]

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,919]

5 hours ago, Vesper said:

Biden is not running, Harris is, as much as Trump and the MAGAts wish it were not so.

There's not really a material difference at the end of the day. In fact, one might even argue that before losing his mind, Biden was actually a bit charismatic. Kamala doesnt have that, which is why I feel she does her best when not giving interviews and letting others speak for her. She doesnt have the "IT" factor about herself, which is why they have begun dragging out people like obama to yell at black men.