-TSS-

So,Theresa May delayed the vote knowing well she would have lost. The deal on offer was not good for neither Brexiteers nor remainers. Now she tries to negotiate a new deal but the EU may not want that. In the old system she could have threatened her own party MPs that either they vote for the deal or there will be new elections. Nowadays however early elections require a 2/3 support in parliament. So she stays on at least for a time being but just like Merkel and Macron she is practically a political corpse.

Macron is going to be around until 2022 as that's when his term as president ends. However, he is already a lame duck. Three and half years is a long time to be a lame duck president.

This is a treaty which binds nobody but please sign it as we are told. This is exactly the treaty after which we have signed we can wave goodbye to any national sovereignty. I bet that in all countries which sign this treaty there will a lot of yellow vests in the future.

Brexit may turn out to be harmful for Britain but so does it for the EU itself too. Hence all the butthurt comments by federalists. Losing a big country, the fifth or sixth largest economy in the world, is a devastating blow. If Cyprus or Malta (or Finland for that matter) seceded from the EU nobody outside of those countries would bat an eyelid about it.

Even though I don't give monkeys about that pos Macron but who would there to be replace him if he resigned? Believe it would never be Le Pen. Namely, Le Pen and her and her father's party are too closely associated with the most humiliating episode of French history, the Vichy-regime.

Immigration into a country like Canada is totally artificial and it wouldn't happen at all if it were not considered desireable by the people who govern Canada. Namely, Canada has no natural immigration which is about people from neighbouring countries immigrating. Canada has only one neighbour and the urge to immigrate from there to Canada is not that great. That certain neighbour not only has a long border with a country which has an average living-standards of 1/10 but that certain neighbour is the most wanted country in the world to immigrate into from all over the world.

I quite like the system here in Finland and other Nordic-countries where the Evangelical-Lutherans are the State-Church(they still are here in Finland, no more in Sweden) that you either belong to the Church or you don't. People really ask do you belong to the Church. They don't ask do you belong to a church. If you belong you pay taxes to the church. If you don't belong to it then you don't pay taxes to the church. The taxes are about 1% of your income. Even though unlike the previous decades when the church-membership was over 90% of the population and now it has fallen to 70% and still falling I can't help wondering what goes in the mind of people who rather spend their money on paying the salaries of bishops rather than keep the money themselves. I personally quit the church as soon as I had my 18th birthday and therefore was able to make decisions for myself. It is a different thing in other countries. If you are baptised, for example, catholic they will always count you as one of theirs, no matter how irreligious you may be. In countries such as Canada or the US the idea of a state-church is of course unthinkable for the sheer reason that the population is so fractured coming from different backgrounds. Yet it doesn't seem to stop bible-bashing.

Our puppet-politicians here in Finland are going to sign this treaty. Meanwhile quite a numer of countries are refusing. Our cultural-marxist MSM is telling us that this is not a real contract and it is not going to bind us to anything. Yes yes, all the time and effort has been spent just for fun to prepare a treaty which binds nobody. Unfortunately some people actually believe that.

George HW Bush is dead. I wonder is Trump welcome to his funeral. I was counting the other day; there have recently been during the term of any president five former living presidents since when Clinton started when there were Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan and Bush sr. When GW Bush started there were Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush sr and Clinton. When Obama started there were Ford, Carter, Bush sr, Clinton and Bush GW . When Trump started there were Carter, Bush sr, Clinton, Bush GW and Obama.

Too many people voted for Brexit, the right decision, for the wrong reason. Namely, in terms of immigration Brexit will slow the flow of the Polish or Romanian immigrants but will not affect that from Pakistan or Bangladesh which always was the main gripe people had concerning immigration.

There has been a big news today here in Finland as how some Finnish religious nutjobs have been arrested in Malaysia for the crime of handing out bibles and other Christian material to the local people. Under the Malaysian law that is strictly forbidden! Therefore those Finnish bible-bashers may face up to five years in jail. Hahaa! They must have known the consequences in advance but they still decided to go on about it. I personally hope the Malaysian authorities lock them up and lose the key. Namely, if you protest against the ongoing invasion from the Muslim-countries into Europe you can't justify the idea that you can just go around and spread your gospel to their countries. We always say here in Europe that the migrants should adapt to our laws and customs. Why would some bible-bashers in Malaysia be excused from the same demand?

Too bad that my step-dad is dead as he was an eager traveller and I can just imagine what he would say today about the claims that aviation pollutes the environment and people should reduce flying or preferably give it up altogether. If he were here today he would really say what he thinks of those green politicians. At least here in Finland the greens are the descendants of communists. In West-Germany the greens were founded with a help by Stasi of East-Germany with sole aim to subvert the West-German society.

Yesterday a work-mate of mine who started a two-week holiday told me he was going to Thailand. I asked him what was there about. He said that just for the sake of it. I was kind of thinking, wait a minute, a work-mate of mine who makes the same money as I do goes to Thailand just for the sake of it when he obviously is not going to row there or even go by ship but most probably going to fly there and fly back again. What were we told about the harmful effects of aviation? It is so ingrained in our western psyche that it is our human-right to fly all over the skies to places just for fun that I am just eagerly waiting for the green-politicians who will win the next elections here in Finland either to stop people from travelling for fun or, more likely, pretending not to see as telling people to stop travelling for fun isn't going to win you a lot of votes especially as those very same green politicians do it themselves as well. However, the hypocrasy is just delicious. The same green politicians who are fighting climate-change are posting on their instagramm-accounts pictures of their holidays in sardinia, Corsica or some other placwes where I suspect they did not row into.

I'm beginning to think that if you entered google or wikipedia the word puppet you would get the Macron as an answer.

There has been speculation that as the whites in the USA will fall below the 50% mark unless the Republicans somehow reinvent themselves and get rid of the stigma of being a rich old white men's party they may be permanently out of power in the future. Trump could be the last Republican president. Namely, the voting-behaviour of the black and Hispanic people has remained more or less the same over decades. It is only the whites' votes which swing back and forth. The blacks vote for the Democrats 90-10 and the Hispanics vote for the Democrats 70-30. Demography is destiny. The Republicans are not going to disappear totally; no doubt they will still be strong at the state-level in many states but they may be permanently out at the federal level. That could spell the end for the two-party system in the USA as it is impossible that after some time when there has been a Democratic President and Democratic Congress that people wouldn't feel a need for a change. Some new alternative may rise. ma t

I've been receiving hundreds of junk mail in Chinese or some other oriental language but the title of the e-mails is the name of this site.

Unbelievable that Pocahontas still got elected after she was made to look a fool after the DNA test-episode.

There is a common analysis that demographics will favour the Democrats and that is partially true. However, to claim that after a while the Democrats will be in power permanently and the Republicans never as old white men will have died underestimates the factor that people tend to get bored and dissatisfied with one bunch being in power forever and there will always be a natural yearning for a change.

If more than two parties had elected representatives the USA would be having a similar dilemma as Canada and the UK with the voting-system. As long as there are only two parties you can have single-member electoral districts, the one with most votes wins. However, if there are more than two parties with none of them receiving more than 50% of the votes, the results would be very didproportional to the voter outcome.

If the Republicans win the House there will be claims that Putin has hacked the elections.

A president who loses control of congress In mid-terms has increased chances of getting re-elected two years later. Namely he can say for the next two years how he would do this or that but Congress does not let him do it.

Has there ever been a mid-term election that the president's party would not have suffered losses?

I try not to sound condescending or arrogant or belittling the problem of the caravan but I can't help thinking that if Europe had a problem of 7000 people trying to enter Europe illegally it would be just wonderful as that is the number who get in like every week if not day. However, I do understand that when it is only 7000 people you get told that c'mon it is only 7000 people but if you cave in this time there will be a next time and the number will be much bigger.

In the 1992 presidential elections Ross Perot got 19% of the votes. Do you think he destroyed Bush's chances to be re-elected or did he take votes away from Clinton as well?

It is already annoying as for certain the Democratic gains will be analysed as a huge protest against Trump even though in every mid-terms the Presidents party suffers setbacks.