bookmaker gambling

A ‘color revolution’, as we define it, is a mass uprising fueled by the rejection of official election results, backed by political, diplomatic, and financial support from external forces. This idea first took root in Serbia in 2000, with the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic. The term itself emerged three years later in Georgia, where protesters led by Mikhail Saakashvili adopted roses as their symbol. Another three years later, Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution marked the color shift to orange. A decade ago, ‘color revolutions’ seemed to have peaked, especially after the bloody Euromaidan in Ukraine, which plunged the country into a prolonged series of armed conflicts. This development made previous uprisings appear relatively tame. The phenomenon appeared to have receded, only to reemerge in Armenia in 2018 – though this was more of an internal shift than an externally influenced one. Meanwhile, Belarus’s failed 2020 revolution, met with stern resistance from authorities and a clear warning from Moscow, looked like a line in the sand. Yet, the situation in Georgia today – with large pro-Western opposition protests – suggests the possibility of a new mass protest, though it is dramatically different from the past. The ruling Georgian Dream party has locked itself into an intense standoff with the political West, particularly with the US and EU. It is surprising to see Georgia’s government stand so firmly against its Western partners, but there is little choice; as history has shown, the US-led bloc does not tolerate half-measures when its interests are at stake. Bidzina Ivanishvili, the founder of Georgian Dream, and his party base their strategy on three main conclusions: Firstly, Western Europe and the US, preoccupied with issues far beyond the South Caucasus, are unlikely to direct the same level of political and material resources to Georgia as they did in previous revolutions. In today’s global environment, Tbilisi is simply not a priority. Secondly, the context has changed. When the Rose Revolution unfolded in 2003, Georgia was in a dire state. The government, led by Eduard Shevardnadze, was deeply unpopular, and the country was in disarray. Today, Georgia enjoys relative stability and economic growth. While challenges persist, the choice between “real prosperity” and a fleeting, uncertain promise of Western-led change has shifted the balance of opinion in favor of continuity. Thirdly, a regime change in Georgia now would almost certainly lead to chaos. The experience of countries in the region shows that compromises and yielding to external pressure lead to the collapse of governments. Ivanishvili’s strategy is clear: resist Western influence, as succumbing to it has proven disastrous for others. However, the Tbilisi authorities’ calculations could be flawed. The significance of events in Georgia now extends beyond its borders, especially in light of the escalating tensions over Ukraine and political shifts in the US. The West’s desire to undermine what it perceives as pro-Russian forces has made Georgia a symbolic battleground, amplifying the consequences of any perceived defiance. The fact that Georgian Dream is in no way pro-Russian, but simply seeks to maintain a detached position, does not change the situation. Tbilisi’s decision to freeze EU accession talks was a bold move, signaling its willingness to challenge Western demands. The EU sees its ability to influence its applicants as a point of pride, and any setback, like Georgia’s hesitation, will be seen as a failure of its policies. Those who are seen as clients of the West must now swear an oath. And unwillingness to follow the common path is equated with treason. This situation raises questions about the degree of public support for the government’s stance. The Georgian population has long been divided on the issue of European integration. The government’s position resonates with some, particularly those who see the West’s influence as counterproductive, while others demand a clearer path toward EU membership. For the opposition, this is an opportunity to exploit popular discontent and mobilize protests. The key challenge for both sides will be managing the potential for violence. ‘Color revolutions’ have always relied on the ability to escalate tensions and frame the government as authoritarian. The authorities, for their part, must maintain a delicate balance, avoiding provocations while standing firm against external pressure. The ‘European future’ is a popular image among Georgians, and the majority of Georgian Dream supporters share this aspiration too. The party itself is firmly committed to the goals of European integration, but with its own conditions. The opposition’s argument is that the government is blocking the European path, which automatically means that Tbilisi will return to Moscow’s sphere of influence. The only question is how persistently and passionately this argument will be repeated. The ‘color revolution’ model, once a symbol of democratic aspirations, risks being used as a blunt tool in geopolitical maneuvering. Whether these external forces can still effectively destabilize governments in the region remains to be seen. Democracy promotion (in various guises) was relevant as long as the Western idea of socio-political progress was seen as essentially the only option. Now, as the global order undergoes significant change, this era of unchallenged Western influence is ending, replaced by a fierce struggle for a place in the new geopolitical system. The term ‘color revolution’ has evolved from a symbol of popular democratic uprisings to a tool of political engineering used by the West for influence. The question now is whether these revolutions still have the power to destabilize countries like Georgia – or if the state can resist the pressure and secure its sovereignty in a new world order. This article was first published by the newspaper Profile and was translated and edited by the RT teambookmaker gambling 。

Alphabet Inc. ( NASDAQ:GOOG – Get Free Report ) dropped 2.1% on Friday . The stock traded as low as $192.07 and last traded at $193.03. Approximately 4,007,834 shares were traded during trading, a decline of 80% from the average daily volume of 19,714,412 shares. The stock had previously closed at $197.10. Wall Street Analysts Forecast Growth A number of analysts have issued reports on the company. UBS Group raised their price target on Alphabet from $187.00 to $192.00 and gave the stock a “neutral” rating in a research note on Wednesday, October 30th. Phillip Securities upgraded shares of Alphabet to a “strong-buy” rating in a report on Friday, November 1st. Pivotal Research increased their price target on shares of Alphabet from $215.00 to $225.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research note on Wednesday, October 30th. DA Davidson upgraded Alphabet to a “hold” rating in a report on Tuesday, September 10th. Finally, JPMorgan Chase & Co. lifted their target price on Alphabet from $208.00 to $212.00 and gave the company an “overweight” rating in a report on Wednesday, October 30th. Five research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating, thirteen have given a buy rating and three have assigned a strong buy rating to the company’s stock. According to data from MarketBeat, Alphabet has a consensus rating of “Moderate Buy” and an average target price of $200.56. Read Our Latest Research Report on GOOG Alphabet Trading Down 1.6 % Alphabet ( NASDAQ:GOOG – Get Free Report ) last issued its earnings results on Tuesday, October 29th. The information services provider reported $2.12 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of $1.83 by $0.29. The business had revenue of $88.27 billion for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $86.39 billion. Alphabet had a net margin of 27.74% and a return on equity of 31.66%. The company’s revenue for the quarter was up 15.1% on a year-over-year basis. During the same quarter in the prior year, the business posted $1.55 EPS. As a group, analysts forecast that Alphabet Inc. will post 8.02 earnings per share for the current fiscal year. Alphabet Announces Dividend The company also recently announced a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Monday, December 16th. Stockholders of record on Monday, December 9th were given a $0.20 dividend. The ex-dividend date was Monday, December 9th. This represents a $0.80 annualized dividend and a dividend yield of 0.41%. Alphabet’s payout ratio is 10.61%. Insider Activity at Alphabet In related news, CEO Sundar Pichai sold 22,500 shares of the stock in a transaction dated Wednesday, October 2nd. The shares were sold at an average price of $167.07, for a total transaction of $3,759,075.00. Following the sale, the chief executive officer now owns 2,129,306 shares in the company, valued at $355,743,153.42. This represents a 1.05 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is available through this hyperlink . Also, CAO Amie Thuener O’toole sold 2,834 shares of Alphabet stock in a transaction that occurred on Tuesday, October 15th. The shares were sold at an average price of $167.23, for a total value of $473,929.82. Following the completion of the transaction, the chief accounting officer now owns 26,349 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $4,406,343.27. The trade was a 9.71 % decrease in their ownership of the stock. The disclosure for this sale can be found here . In the last ninety days, insiders have sold 161,455 shares of company stock valued at $28,462,960. Corporate insiders own 12.99% of the company’s stock. Hedge Funds Weigh In On Alphabet Several hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently modified their holdings of the company. FMR LLC grew its position in Alphabet by 5.2% in the 3rd quarter. FMR LLC now owns 114,802,133 shares of the information services provider’s stock worth $19,193,768,000 after purchasing an additional 5,655,022 shares during the last quarter. Geode Capital Management LLC increased its position in Alphabet by 0.3% in the 3rd quarter. Geode Capital Management LLC now owns 103,557,486 shares of the information services provider’s stock valued at $17,247,208,000 after acquiring an additional 259,213 shares during the period. UBS AM a distinct business unit of UBS ASSET MANAGEMENT AMERICAS LLC raised its stake in Alphabet by 10.3% during the 3rd quarter. UBS AM a distinct business unit of UBS ASSET MANAGEMENT AMERICAS LLC now owns 33,334,082 shares of the information services provider’s stock valued at $5,573,125,000 after acquiring an additional 3,113,395 shares in the last quarter. Jennison Associates LLC grew its stake in shares of Alphabet by 9.1% in the third quarter. Jennison Associates LLC now owns 15,424,324 shares of the information services provider’s stock worth $2,578,793,000 after purchasing an additional 1,291,274 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Dimensional Fund Advisors LP increased its holdings in shares of Alphabet by 4.5% during the second quarter. Dimensional Fund Advisors LP now owns 14,657,421 shares of the information services provider’s stock valued at $2,688,743,000 after purchasing an additional 636,008 shares during the period. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 27.26% of the company’s stock. About Alphabet ( Get Free Report ) Alphabet Inc offers various products and platforms in the United States, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, the Asia-Pacific, Canada, and Latin America. It operates through Google Services, Google Cloud, and Other Bets segments. The Google Services segment provides products and services, including ads, Android, Chrome, devices, Gmail, Google Drive, Google Maps, Google Photos, Google Play, Search, and YouTube. Featured Articles Receive News & Ratings for Alphabet Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Alphabet and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .Fianna Fail and Fine Gael eye independent TDs as option to secure Dail majority

NDA tastes bypoll success in Bihar, Assam, Meghalaya; Bengal remains elusive

FBI Director Wray says he intends to resign before Trump takes office in JanuaryIn the final days before Romania’s parliamentary elections this weekend, the governing parties’ leaders both quit, pollsters gave up on projecting the results and the nation’s top court cast serious doubt on the integrity of the voting process. And the stakes couldn’t be higher. Sunday’s parliamentary contest pits the pro-European establishment against far-right insurgents and will help to determine whether a critical NATO member and Ukrainian ally lurches closer to Moscow. It takes place in an atmosphere of scarcely believable chaos and confusion. Romania is in the middle of three consecutive weekend ballots for both a new parliament and a new president. Events spun off the rails in the first round of the presidential election on Nov. 24, when a Russia sympathizer with barely any public profile emerged as the shock winner. Calin Georgescu reported zero spending on a campaign that was mainly driven by social media videos on TikTok recorded from his living room. His victory sparked fears that Romania’s democratic process had been hacked by the Kremlin. In the country’s biggest political crisis since the communist regime collapsed over three decades ago, the constitutional court has ordered a recount of the presidential ballots, but it won’t have the fresh results until Sunday night and there is mounting speculation that it may order a rerun. As voters prepare to return to the polls on Sunday, there are major questions hanging over the process that they simply do not have answers to. The prospect of a far-right surge has sent hundreds to take the streets in freezing temperatures. In Bucharest, demonstrators chanted “We want freedom, not fascism.” For all the concerns about Russian interference, there’s also deep frustration, especially outside the major cities, with the mainstream candidates who were ejected in the first presidential ballot. Romania’s two most established parties, the Social Democrats and the Liberals, have governed in coalition for the past three years and the country has suffered rising inequality and rampant inflation. The vote puts 19 million Romanians at the heart of the struggle between the democratic institutions of the European Union and Russia’s expansionary ambitions. To the north, Romania borders Ukraine, where the Russian army has been fighting for almost three years to restore what President Vladimir Putin says is his country’s historic territorial rights. To the east is Moldova, where a pro-Western president survived another election earlier this month amid widespread reports of Kremlin interference. Putin’s ally Viktor Orban governs Hungary to the west. Romania, too, an EU member, could soon have a pro-Russian president and a far-right government, if the next two weeks of voting break in their favor. Many Romanians only began to learn after the vote about 62-year-old Georgescu, the agricultural engineer who languished in the single digits in polls just weeks before the election. A one-time ally of ultranationalist Alliance for the Unity of Romanians, Georgescu has denounced military support for Ukraine, called for a quick end to the war and cast doubt on the benefits of the country’s NATO membership. “I do not want to leave NATO, I do not want to leave the European Union,” he said on Tuesday, pushing back against his characterization by the local media. “I am a Romanian — I have no connection with Russia, I’m not a legionnaire, I’m not an antisemite.” Some of the comments collide with previous statements, in which he laid blame for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with NATO — and raised the prospect of leaving the military alliance if it didn’t guarantee peace. In 2020, Georgescu praised Putin as one of the worlds few true leaders. The alarm deepened after Georgescu said he had no campaign funding — and that supporter financing had been donated. The claim raised hackles from critics who pointed out that the candidate’s high-resolution videos, including some with sweeping landscape shots — featuring him on horseback, performing judo moves, dipping into a mountain lake — could only have been produced by professionals. An investigation by local news website G4media suggested the effort was artificially amplified by foreign interference. Georgescu’s profile was heavily promoted by a volunteers who were prompted to spread posts in exchange for “undisclosed rewards,” the website reported. A similar scheme took place during the vote in Moldova. Romania’s Supreme Defense Council, which includes top government and intelligence officials, issued a statement Thursday saying that one candidate — it didn’t name Georgescu — benefited from “massive exposure and preferential treatment.” The panel cited Russian influence operations that aimed to shift public opinion in Romania — and accused TikTok of failing to label the candidate’s videos as election material as required by Romanian law. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who has frequently misled the media over previous disinformation campaigns, said Friday that allegations of Russian interference in Romanian elections are unfounded and unsupported, according to the Interfax news agency. TikTok said it was “categorically false” to claim that it treated Georgescu’s account differently from other candidates. Adding to the sense of a country spinning out of control, Social Democrat Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu resigned his party’s leadership while his coalition partners, the Liberals, ousted their leader. After pollsters completely missed Georgescu’s victory last week, they’ve opted not to release any further surveys, so voters, candidates and officials are all essentially flying blind ahead of Sunday’s vote. Before the voluntary polling blackout, the ultranationalists tied to another candidate George Simion, had been making steady gains and were running second place behind the Social Democrats. Now though, no one is really sure where they stand. “The situation is very fluid,” said Remus Stefureac, the director of research firm INSCOP. He predicted that Romania’s pro-European would still get between 50% and 60%, enabling them to form a government, but without much conviction. “In a background of increased social tensions, a sovereign movement can get a temporary boost,” he said. ——— (With assistance from Slav Okov and Demetrios Pogkas.) ©2024 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.Will Trump take Christopher Rufo’s conservative Florida vision nationwide?