If Bernie Sanders doesn't win the Democratic nomination, then most of his supporters will probably support the Democratic nominee, but many might vote Green in the states where the Green Party is on the ballot (22 as of the beginning of this year, maybe around 40 by the time of the election if they keep trying) or Libertarian (all 50 states), and a significant number will probably vote for Donald Trump.
"A capital decision
Sadiq Khan will be London’s new mayor
THE official declaration has not yet taken place, but already it is arithmetically certain that Sadiq Khan has won London’s election and will be the capital’s new mayor. With over 90% of ballots counted he leads Zac Goldsmith, his Tory rival, by 44% to 35%. The decisiveness of his victory is easy enough to understand. London is a Labour city; in Britain, as across northern Europe, the centre-left vote has held up better in metropolitan areas than elsewhere.
Mr Khan had, for example, appeared on platforms with Suliman Gani, a radical imam. Yet as a prominent British Muslim, a civil liberties lawyer and a big figure in London politics (Mr Goldsmith, too, had appeared alongside Mr Gani), it is only natural that Mr Khan should have crossed paths with such characters. Dark Tory warnings about his sympathies looked paranoid when set against his broadly liberal record: the MP for Tooting had supported gay marriage (for which he received death threats), fought to keep a local pub open and had condemned recent incidents of anti-Semitism in Labour with a vigour conspicuously unmatched by its leadership."
OK, so he may have personally a good record at the present time, when London does not yet have enough Muslims to impose Sharia, but he believes in a religion that commands the imposition of Sharia when that becomes possible there. London has more than 10% Muslims, so if we assume that most Muslims voted for Khan, then that implies most non-Muslims voted against him. The non-Muslims have good reason to feel concerned: installing Muslims in charge of the police can build the foundation for what happened to Hans Litten and what is currently happening in Bangladesh, where groups of Muslim vigilantes ("Sharia patrols") murder blasphemers and are never prosecuted. London endured a year of Sharia patrols, which the police did little about until they provoked a backlash of Christian patrols. The London Sharia patrols didn't murder anyone there as far as I know, but they advocate a doctrine that commands them to murder people, and one of their alumni is reportedly the "New Jihadi John" chopping off Britons' heads on video. Now the Mayor believes in that doctrine also.
It isn't paranoia if they are really out to get you. If they say expressly that they are personally commanded to kill you and your family and your friends, then you should not want them getting anywhere near you. London is in the process of electing most likely a Muslim mayor, even as surveys show that between 20% and 40% of British Muslims want Sharia, which commands the death penalty for blasphemers, unbelievers, apostates, and anybody gay, and demands the violent subjugation of Christians (including the Queen) and Jews. I wish Bernie would denounce Islam instead of embracing it.
Lalmiah said he hopes having Khan as mayor will make it easier to obtain building permits for more mosques and other institutions that serve the Muslim population.
At a nearby polling station, there was a similar sense of accomplishment and progress among Muslim voters.
“It’s a very important day not only for me, but (all) British Muslims as well.” “We want to see him win. It’s a historic day, definitely,” a voter who identified himself as a Muslim, told VOA. “We can see it’s the beginning of a new era.”
In this city whose population is now one-eighth Muslim, the growth of Muslims’ influence in government is cause for skepticism among some.
Most London voters polled ahead of Thursday’s elections cited housing and transport as the main issues. But analysts say underlying concerns about immigration and demographic change could play out in the poll, which may indicate the outcome of a June 23 referendum on whether Britain should remain in the European Union.
Proponents of a British exit, or Brexit, cite immigration and the belief that Britain has lost control of its borders as top concerns."
London endured a year of Sharia patrols from 2013-14, until they provoked a backlash of Christian patrols. I can only hope that what is already happening in Bangladesh does not spread to London: Muslim vigilantes murdering blasphemers and never getting prosecuted.
A Met Police spokesman said: 'On 26 December 2015 at about 12:30hrs, the 15-year-old boy boarded a Route 133 bus on Brixton Road with his 51-year-old grandmother.
'The suspect, who was already on the bus, approached the victim and produced a large kitchen knife, which she attempted to stab the victim with.
'The victim's grandmother intervened and managed to disarm the suspect, who then got off the bus and fled towards Oval.'
The suspect is described as an Asian woman, aged about 20 to 30 years.
She wore a distinctive headscarf with a kangaroo print."
Is "Asian" really the best description they could provide? Asia is huge but she doesn't look Chinese or white Russian, or anybody who could be mistaken for either of those. The perpetrator and victim appear possibly of similar ethnic bacground, so maybe he had said something blasphemous and she felt compelled to kill him as per Islam.
Many Muslims are illiterate, especially the younger ones. BTW, that's part of why many Muslim countries go berserk about cartoons. Because Islam commands believers to kill blasphemers, many Muslim countries (e.g. Pakistan) mandate the death penalty for blasphemy. Even illiterate kids might see a cartoon and laugh and share it with their friends, or worse yet draw a copy. Then the kids would be guilty of blasphemy, and could be killed by either the government or vigilantes who would never be prosecuted. Reports from Iraq and Pakistan say Muslim vigilantes (aka "Sharia patrols") show up and tell you that one of your children has trespassed against Islam, and you must kill your own child or else they will kill your family for failing to uphold Islam. For that reason among others, a cartoon that even an illiterate child could copy sets off a panic and riots. Islam is an inherently violent religion that causes horrible consequences, and sadly many politicians say they "respect" it rather than refuting it.
Someone seems to believe falsely that American hospitals deal primarily with emergencies. In reality, emergency departments account for less than 10% of hospital revenue, and since EMTALA was enacted, we are seeing the planning of new hospitals with no emergency department at all, so they can cash in on infinite elective procedures ("no lifetime caps!") without being bothered by pesky crash victims who might not even have insurance.
Sorry, I don't follow: how exactly having a medical insurance pushes people into Rx drug addiction?
If you read the links, you'd see the connection. The Mexican transnational cartels figured it out first, and capitalized on it. Statistically, you can see the results, as insurance is a major risk factor. I'll explain the mechanism step by step.
First, as background, you should be aware that generic morphine tablets cost less than $0.10 where they can be bought legally. That gives you a baseline cost/value proposition.
Next, enter Rx Oxycontin, which sells for $2, a 2,000% markup, plus the cost of the Rx process.
If people had a free market choice between Oxycontin and morphine, both clearly labeled as addictive, then very few people would choose to pay 20x more for Oxycontin. (Brand name Bob might quibble, but he's lost his memory and his self-contradictory comments on PatNet show he can't even keep track of his own opiate and opioid history.)
The drug war and subsidized insurance combine to remove morphine from the shelf and push Oxycontin prescriptions. Drug manufacturers pay doctors, and incentivize them in other ways (e.g. mandatory continuing education), to drive prescriptions in a more lucrative direction. The linked reports include young people who had been prescribed Oxycontin for sports injuries when they were kids on CHIP, for example. When you're making a 2,000% markup, protected by government, you can share out that markup to a whole patronage network of politicians, lobbyists, salesmen, and so on, to get your product subsidized via insurance and keep your competition criminalized.
So, Oxycontin prescriptions were pushed to people with insurance, which made the Oxycontin seem "free" or at least "affordable," and many of those people were told fraudulently that Oxycontin supposedly wasn't addictive. Many got addicted. Poor people with prescriptions could sell their quality-controlled Oxycontin for cash and buy cheaper street heroin, increasing their dose. Poor people whose prescriptions had run out could buy street heroin to continue their addiction. Rich people had a choice, paying cash for somebody else's clean Oxycontin or buying heroin, which the cartels can reportedly deliver to practically any door within 20 minutes. Either way, the more people you put on insurance, the more people you can put on Oxycontin, and the more heroin addicts you end up with.
"She was discharged but came back to the hospital days later with intra-abdominal hemorrhage and cardiopulmonary arrest. An autopsy revealed that the needle inserted during the pericardiocentesis grazed the liver causing a pseudoaneurysm that resulted in subsequent rupture and death," the authors wrote.
"The death certificate listed the cause of death as cardiovascular," they said.
They said there are three strategies which should be deployed to reduce the numbers of deaths from medical error. "Making errors more visible when they occur so their effects can be intercepted; having remedies at hand to rescue patients; and making errors less frequent by following principles that take human limitations into account," the authors wrote."