Beginning to look like Nikki Haley may be on verge of victory in Vermont.
NYT blog - Nate Cohn: Donald Trump holds a slight lead in Vermont, but the outstanding vote comes from areas that seem likely to favor Haley. It could be enough for her to win her first state.
Nice to have one race that is even a little bit competitive. Haley won Washington DC (not a state) last week iirc.
And tonight in Virginia, Haley is carrying Arlington Co, Fairfax Co and City of Arlington within DC Beltway.
Also City of Charlottesville and surrounding Albemarle Co; perhaps locals did NOT appreciate Trump doing his dog-whittling for murdering Nazis on their home turf?
California Here We Come! with 38% reporting Adam Schiff Democrat 1,105,697 36.9% Steve Garvey Republican 868,808 29.0% Katie Porter Democrat 446,765 14.9% Barbara Lee Democrat 214,301 7.2% Total reported 2,994,984
SSI - AP has called Schiff as making Top Two, pretty obviously as #1.
And hard to believe that Porter can catch up with Garvey.
Note that neither Porter nor Lee are leading in any county.
Granted, I think he should probably strive for a bit more balance, because he has a tendency to only highlight good polls for Trump; but there are so many people on the other side of the fence, it's an omission I'm willing to forgive.
Plus in what version of PB is posting polls being tiresome.
I do not agree with @williamglenn but he is not a troll and has every right to post on here unless he does something that upsets the moderators
Indeed he is a long standing contributer to this forum
Beginning to look like Nikki Haley may be on verge of victory in Vermont.
NYT blog - Nate Cohn: Donald Trump holds a slight lead in Vermont, but the outstanding vote comes from areas that seem likely to favor Haley. It could be enough for her to win her first state.
Nice to have one race that is even a little bit competitive. Haley won Washington DC (not a state) last week iirc.
And tonight in Virginia, Haley is carrying Arlington Co, Fairfax Co and City of Arlington within DC Beltway.
Also City of Charlottesville and surrounding Albemarle Co; perhaps locals did NOT appreciate Trump doing his dog-whittling for murdering Nazis on their home turf?
Is dog-whittling like flint-napping?
Dog-whistling was what I meant; my fat finger are the culprits.
Dog-whistling as when Trump gave killer Nazis a big blow after Charlottesville.
Interesting article. The numbers in the Times polling have a very bad smell indeed.
There is something wrong at the New York Times From presidential polls to refusing to report on Trump’s stumbles, things aren’t adding up at the Gray Lady https://www.salon.com/2024/03/05/there-is-something-at-the-new-york-times/ ...How did the New York Times come up with a polling sample that included 36 percent rural voters when the 2020 proportion of rural voters was 19 percent? Somehow, the poll’s sample of female voters was equally skewed. The poll found Trump winning the female vote by one percent, when Biden carried women in 2020 by 11 points. .. ..The poll shows that Trump still has the support of nearly every Republican who voted for him in 2020 — this in the face of the fact that between 30 and 40 percent of primary voters have chosen another candidate than Trump. Those people are not poll respondents. They’re voters. The Times/Siena poll also somehow comes up with 12 percent support among Democrats for Rep. Dean Phillips, who has yet to get more than two percent of the vote in a primary. Even Phillips himself posted a tweet that said “When the NYT/Siena poll shows me at 12%, you better believe it’s flawed. Only 5% even know who I am.” The poll also shows that among respondents who described themselves as unhappy with both candidates, they favor Biden over Trump by 12 points. So Biden has the utterly disaffected vote and carries independents by four points, and he’s losing to Trump by four points?
It just doesn’t add up.
Why is the New York Times missing the red flags in its own polls? More important, why has the paper decided to give its own deeply biased poll results such heavy play? ..
Beginning to look like Nikki Haley may be on verge of victory in Vermont.
NYT blog - Nate Cohn: Donald Trump holds a slight lead in Vermont, but the outstanding vote comes from areas that seem likely to favor Haley. It could be enough for her to win her first state.
Nice to have one race that is even a little bit competitive. Haley won Washington DC (not a state) last week iirc.
And tonight in Virginia, Haley is carrying Arlington Co, Fairfax Co and City of Arlington within DC Beltway.
Also City of Charlottesville and surrounding Albemarle Co; perhaps locals did NOT appreciate Trump doing his dog-whittling for murdering Nazis on their home turf?
Is dog-whittling like flint-napping?
Dog-whistling was what I meant; my fat finger are the culprits.
Dog-whistling as when Trump gave killer Nazis a big blow after Charlottesville.
Dog whittling is something we do know that flint knappers occasionally partake in.
She should have flown out to 100/1 but she's still bizarrely at 20/1.
And yes, I did take a few quid of that - in my defence it's not because I fancy her chances but because I've just had a huge servicing bill in for my car and I need to unlock some cash.
Feel certain that Mrs O is happy to help out . . . even an unrepentant carbon-burner.
This is a remarkable case. Definitely not recommended, but it does illustrate that even extreme vaccination seems pretty safe.
Adaptive immune responses are larger and functionally preserved in a hypervaccinated individual https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(24)00134-8/fulltext Here, we report on a 62-year-old male hypervaccinated individual from Magdeburg, Germany (HIM), who deliberately and for private reasons received 217 vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 within a period of 29 months (figure A; appendix 1 tab 1). HIM's hypervaccination occurred outside of a clinical study context and against national vaccination recommendations. Evidence for 130 vaccinations in a 9 month period was collected by the public prosecutor of Magdeburg, Germany, who opened an investigation of this case with the allegation of fraud, but criminal charges were not filed. 108 vaccinations are individually recorded and partly overlap with the total of 130 prosecutor-confirmed vaccinations (appendix 2 p 12). To investigate the immunological consequences of hypervaccination in this unique situation, we submitted an analysis proposal to HIM via the public prosecutor. HIM then actively and voluntarily consented to provide medical information and donate blood and saliva. This procedure was approved by the local Ethics Committee of the University Hospital of Erlangen, Germany. Throughout the entire hypervaccination schedule HIM did not report any vaccination-related side effects. From November 2019, to October 2023, 62 routine clinical chemistry parameters showed no abnormalities attributable to hypervaccination ..
She should have flown out to 100/1 but she's still bizarrely at 20/1.
And yes, I did take a few quid of that - in my defence it's not because I fancy her chances but because I've just had a huge servicing bill in for my car and I need to unlock some cash.
Feel certain that Mrs O is happy to help out . . . even an unrepentant carbon-burner.
Make that semi-unrepentant, as presumably your auto tuneup & etc. will improve your gas mileage and/or reduce emissions.
In CA, AP has called US Senate race for Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey.
So it will be a real "play ball!" contest in the Fall, a real pitchers's duel . . . with the pitchers throwing bean balls at one another.
Note that, like Hershel Walker of Georgia, Steve Harvey was BIG time sports star, in his case for the Los Angeles Dodgers.
Note also that Schiff paid for pro Garvey advertising. I quite like Schiff, but this seemed a little off as a tactic for reducing the chances if his Democratic opponents.
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
My original post just had the numbers for Biden v Haley, so the joke was that it could be in the bag if they picked her. Then I saw that they also polled Biden v Trump so added that for completeness.
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
Well, it isn't, because there isn't much betting opportunity on her. That's just people wanting to cheer an opponent to Trump.
There has been a lot of movement on Biden and Obama overnight.
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
Well, it isn't, because there isn't much betting opportunity on her. That's just people wanting to cheer an opponent to Trump.
There has been a lot of movement on Biden and Obama overnight.
Well it is. 😊
How Haley voters turn out in the general election could be decisive in the likely Biden/Trump contest. She got pretty good results in some of the swing states.
Re the US swing states, there has been a lot of focus on how the conflicts in the Middle East may pout Michigan in place but keep an eye on Minnesota - 20% of the Democrat primary voters voted "uncommitted" vs 12% in Michigan. Minnesota has a large Somali population.
There is a tendency to think of the Palestine issue as an Arab one whereas in fact it is a Muslim one (according to pious Muslims, there can be no compromise over Palestine and Israel cannot exist).
Four decades of Tory defence cuts, that of course might be turned round in 12 hours.
The purpose of 216 and other "squadrons" like it is to create more CO posts as a retention measure. So any activity or lack thereof is mostly irrelevant. Any group of four people stood together for more than a quarter of an hour will now be given a squadron nameplate in the RAF.
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
Well, it isn't, because there isn't much betting opportunity on her. That's just people wanting to cheer an opponent to Trump.
There has been a lot of movement on Biden and Obama overnight.
Well it is. 😊
How Haley voters turn out in the general election could be decisive in the likely Biden/Trump contest. She got pretty good results in some of the swing states.
It was quite a strong showing for Haley across the board, though she won't have many delegates to show for it.
If the Old Bill or Grim Reaper get Trump then she would get the nomination.
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
Um, this is a betting site.
I have money riding on the Presidential election and I value @williamglenn sharing the data.
Fair enough, but @williamglenn only shares data favourable to Trump, which to determine betting options is sub-optimal. Granted, there isn't much positive polling for the Biden Team at present, but when there was, you didn't get the word from @williamglenn. His extrapolation from the poll right months out I objected to, and he has explained that in an earlier post, insomuch as his "joke" was that if Halley was the nominee she would walk the election. I am not sure how we can use that to determine betting for November. But a good point anyway.
I am sorry to disappoint @DavidL but the Angiolini Report will almost certainly be ignored.
Just as the IICSA Final Report & its recommendations were ostentatiously ignored by the government. As we know - from yet another report - the Met's behaviour in relation to child abuse is as bad as its behaviour to women.
Some recent examples:
1. On 1 March a 29 year old doctor working in a Warwickshire hospital, who had pleaded guilty to 3 counts of making indecent images of children, was sentenced to 10 months imprisonment, suspended for 2 years. He was in possession of more than 50 images, over half in the most extreme category, some of children as young as 5. He also searched for such images.
February
2. A Derbyshire teacher aged 44, found guilty of two counts of rape of an under-age girl pupil he groomed while in a position of trust, was given a 1-year sentence, suspended for 2 years.
3. A 21 year old actor who downloaded 848 child abuse images, 165 in the worst category, was told this by the judge:
‘The images I have seen are sickening. Each of them is a real child being abused for the pleasure of someone like you watching. It is made worse because of the number of them – there were 848 indecent images – and it is made worse by the length of time you were doing it. You told the probation officer you do not have a sexual interest in children. I don’t accept that.’
Despite these strong words, he was given an 8 month sentence, suspended for 2 years. He had been downloading such images since he was 17.
4. A 43-year old man in Warrington convicted of 4 offences of attempting to communicate with a child, possession of child porn & extreme pornography was given an 18 months sentence, suspended for 2 years. Defence counsel argued in mitigation that: “He has perhaps had more than his fair share of problems in his life to overcome.” (This seems to have related to problems with alcohol though since he was also in full-time good employment, it is not entirely clear why these justified such a light sentence, especially as the judge commented that he was in denial about his activities, his sexual interest in children & had not truly shown remorse.) Never mind. He too left court.
5. A 39 year old Stoke man with 78 indecent images of children (described as “disgusting”) was convicted of 3 charges of making indecent images of children, possession of extreme pornography & prohibited images & given a 3-year community order because he had shown remorse despite, once again, the judge pointing out: “These are real children suffering disgraceful, horrible behaviour committed on them by adults.”
6. A 75 year old Dundee banker convicted of having thousands of child abuse images was given a suspended sentence though had his access to the internet restricted.
8. A 71 year old man in Worcester, convicted of having child abuse images for the second time was given a community order.
I could go on.
I am shocked at 2.
In 1975 our Head of Rural Science mysteriously disappeared from school. In early 1976 there was a report on ATV Today confirming he had been sentenced to 15 months in Winson Green for statutory rape. He was married, in his early thirties and had been conducting a sexual relationship with a 15 year old student for a number of months.
By today's standards the sentence was lenient, but fair play no suspended sentence, he was banged to rights, " straight to jail and do not pass go". I am shocked 50 years later we have gone backwards.
Isn't it just that the jails are full, and the Home Office has instructed to give non-custodial sentences as far as possible?
Interesting article. The numbers in the Times polling have a very bad smell indeed.
There is something wrong at the New York Times From presidential polls to refusing to report on Trump’s stumbles, things aren’t adding up at the Gray Lady https://www.salon.com/2024/03/05/there-is-something-at-the-new-york-times/ ...How did the New York Times come up with a polling sample that included 36 percent rural voters when the 2020 proportion of rural voters was 19 percent? Somehow, the poll’s sample of female voters was equally skewed. The poll found Trump winning the female vote by one percent, when Biden carried women in 2020 by 11 points. .. ..The poll shows that Trump still has the support of nearly every Republican who voted for him in 2020 — this in the face of the fact that between 30 and 40 percent of primary voters have chosen another candidate than Trump. Those people are not poll respondents. They’re voters. The Times/Siena poll also somehow comes up with 12 percent support among Democrats for Rep. Dean Phillips, who has yet to get more than two percent of the vote in a primary. Even Phillips himself posted a tweet that said “When the NYT/Siena poll shows me at 12%, you better believe it’s flawed. Only 5% even know who I am.” The poll also shows that among respondents who described themselves as unhappy with both candidates, they favor Biden over Trump by 12 points. So Biden has the utterly disaffected vote and carries independents by four points, and he’s losing to Trump by four points?
It just doesn’t add up.
Why is the New York Times missing the red flags in its own polls? More important, why has the paper decided to give its own deeply biased poll results such heavy play? ..
I would be genuinely interested in @williamglenn 's thoughts on these polling anomalies.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Here's a time sink that I recently learned about. My sister works for a major university in London and she's attempting to recruit a junior to mid level finance analyst in her division. They had 143 applications for the job and because of some insane rules she has to read every single application to give feedback on why they're unsuitable. It's taken her hours and hours to do it and she's said she found the person she wanted by the 5th application, set up the interview and is moving to offer stage. Yet due to the odd rules of the public sector she couldn't shut the process down until the originally stated date and she can't just reply to the rest saying the job has been filled already.
As someone who has hired many, many people the thought of having to reply to every applicant would make me never bother with it. One of the jobs we put out there "Junior Investment Analyst -no degree required" had over 500 applications just from one partner. We used a machine learning sorting system to get through it, iirc by the end of the week there were something like 2000 applications across all partners.
We don't respond to all applications at my university, but all are read by someone (not necessarily in full - you can screen them out as soon as you can see not suitable). Online system and HR or an automated process informs those rejected.
Some academics give feedback to all interviewees, but not all - I normally say they can ask for if they like. If someone was particularly good and I would like to hire them in future I let them know.
ETA: As rottenborough says, we don't tend to look at applications until after the closing date, although we are able to. Shortlisting is always after the closing date.
Be thankful you don't get involved in the endless process of even 'designing' the job description.
Even once it's gone out - I have to read through every single applicant no matter how obviously unfit for the job they are. Then fill in a spreadsheet row for each that ticks various boxes for why they are unfit for the job. Then email that back to HR, Then that kicks off another similar process for the people who _were_ fit for the job. Which then kicks off another...
The candidate we finally pick - I have to write a report justifying why we don't hire them at the very, very bottom of the salary scale. Which quite often delays things enough that the person has found another role. Which kicks off the entire process again.
I wrote an automation for the whole process (or at least cut 99% of if out) but which still ticked all of the tick-boxes.
Which - praise be! - is still entirely ignored several years later.
Only two new senior managers in between who have gone on to better paid things.
I have been interviewing prospective Medical Students over the winter, and we have to carefully document the reasons for all our scores. Unsuccessful candidates fairly frequently complain, and the University has to be able to give reasons. Its just the world we live in.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
Shades of David Cameron's mum advising Jeremy Corbyn to wear a suit.
I must admit the idea of SKS in some fabulous crepe-de-chine creation was the idea in my head when I first read this... not sure if it's me or the Dark Lord who should get stronger pills...
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
Ah yes, I take your point. There seems to have been a swing against the Republicans in very specific demographics - suburban women, in particular - and pollsters may not be accounting for that in their methodologies.
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
Um, this is a betting site.
I have money riding on the Presidential election and I value @williamglenn sharing the data.
Fair enough, but @williamglenn only shares data favourable to Trump, which to determine betting options is sub-optimal. Granted, there isn't much positive polling for the Biden Team at present, but when there was, you didn't get the word from @williamglenn. His extrapolation from the poll right months out I objected to, and he has explained that in an earlier post, insomuch as his "joke" was that if Halley was the nominee she would walk the election. I am not sure how we can use that to determine betting for November. But a good point anyway.
tbf There's been a few polls showing Haley doing better than Trump against Biden in head-to-head polling, but worse when including other candidates eg: Feb 25-28 Beacon Research/Shaw Biden 47 Trump 49 Biden 42 Haley 50
Biden 38 Trump 41 Kennedy 13 West 3 Stein 2 Biden 35 Haley 28 Kennedy 24 West 5 Stein 2
btw that latest Morning Consult with Biden 1 ahead seems to be the first Biden lead for Morning Consult in 18 head to head national polls (since 8th Jan). Probably just noise.
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
Um, this is a betting site.
I have money riding on the Presidential election and I value @williamglenn sharing the data.
Fair enough, but @williamglenn only shares data favourable to Trump, which to determine betting options is sub-optimal. Granted, there isn't much positive polling for the Biden Team at present, but when there was, you didn't get the word from @williamglenn. His extrapolation from the poll right months out I objected to, and he has explained that in an earlier post, insomuch as his "joke" was that if Halley was the nominee she would walk the election. I am not sure how we can use that to determine betting for November. But a good point anyway.
Good on you for acknowledging that.
I'm not sure any of us are perfectly balanced. He might feel he needs to overcompensate because no-one else is making the case.
FWIW I think it shows Trump is still great value to win the popular vote at 4.5 on Betfair.
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
Um, this is a betting site.
I have money riding on the Presidential election and I value @williamglenn sharing the data.
Fair enough, but @williamglenn only shares data favourable to Trump, which to determine betting options is sub-optimal. Granted, there isn't much positive polling for the Biden Team at present, but when there was, you didn't get the word from @williamglenn. His extrapolation from the poll right months out I objected to, and he has explained that in an earlier post, insomuch as his "joke" was that if Halley was the nominee she would walk the election. I am not sure how we can use that to determine betting for November. But a good point anyway.
Are you expecting @Scott_xP to post favourable news about the Cons.
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
Um, this is a betting site.
I have money riding on the Presidential election and I value @williamglenn sharing the data.
Fair enough, but @williamglenn only shares data favourable to Trump, which to determine betting options is sub-optimal. Granted, there isn't much positive polling for the Biden Team at present, but when there was, you didn't get the word from @williamglenn. His extrapolation from the poll right months out I objected to, and he has explained that in an earlier post, insomuch as his "joke" was that if Halley was the nominee she would walk the election. I am not sure how we can use that to determine betting for November. But a good point anyway.
Are you expecting @Scott_xP to post favourable news about the Cons.
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
This would be a new one in humans, though, if it mutates to allow human to human transmission. The concern is that the few human cases have so far seen a very high mortality rate (though that might change in a mutated strain). I believe we already have some stockpile of vaccine. And monitoring is a bit better than it was pre-pandemic.
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
10pm @GBNEWS: A group of men from Syria & Kuwait have been convicted of raping and abusing a child in Newcastle. BBC Newsnight did a puff piece on the now confirmed grooming gang in 2016, saying how awful it was that they’d been accused of such crimes.
To show how overworked our criminal system a 5 year delay for a rape case is quite fast nowadays...
My current one is a single complainer rape from May 2019. My last one was from 2019 as well. It really doesn’t help and the damage done by the delay on the complainer and the accused is palpable.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
Not in all states - in NC, for example, Trump's result matched his polling.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
And the 'inquiry' into Covid probably won't have reported by the next crisis; and even if it has, it will have not produced any recommendations that would help. Out inquiry is just a stupid waste of money.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
He has the world's thinnest skin, if she wins even a single state he will blow a gasket, which justifies her staying in the race this long.
Surprisingly Haley has ramped up her criticism of him, the question is whether those voting for her follow through on saying they won't back Trump - DeSantis and his supporters crumbled immediately despite also increasing his criticism of Trump after all.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
If the Tories are nicking Labour ideas after previously saying how terrible they are maybe that tells us that other Labour plans are pretty robust too.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
It was a caucus, not a primary. That requires a lot more commitment.
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
And the 'inquiry' into Covid probably won't have reported by the next crisis; and even if it has, it will have not produced any recommendations that would help. Out inquiry is just a stupid waste of money.
The inquiry is bogged down in political trivia. The scientific bit should be done and dusted now, with clear recommendations and actions for future pandemics.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
I don't think American Samoa or other US Territories get to vote for the POTUS, so may not be quite typical.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
Watch out for a possible 1% income tax cut as well as the NI cuts.
Or maybe the 2% cut will be to income tax INSTEAD of NI??
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
He has the world's thinnest skin, if she wins even a single state he will blow a gasket, which justifies her staying in the race this long.
Surprisingly Haley has ramped up her criticism of him, the question is whether those voting for her follow through on saying they won't back Trump - DeSantis and his supporters crumbled immediately despite also increasing his criticism of Trump after all.
She won a state - Vermont More pertinently, she was getting a steady 20 or 30% in a number of larger states. She won't get many delegates as most if the big contests have been fixed as winner takes all. But it's a lot of votes against the presumptive nominee, and quite a high proportion of them won't vote for Trump in the general.
She doesn't seem ready to fold quite yet. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/05/super-tuesday-2024/haley-campaign-speaks-00145247 "Unity is not achieved by simply claiming 'we’re united,'" she continued, an apparent reference to calls from Donald Trump and his allies for the party to join in support of him. "Today, in state after state, there remains a large block of Republican primary voters who are expressing deep concerns about Donald Trump. That is not the unity our party needs for success. Addressing those voters’ concerns will make the Republican Party and America better."..
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
I don't think American Samoa or other US Territories get to vote for the POTUS, so may not be quite typical.
AIUI they get to vote in the actual election not in the primaries. On a general point, the American election system seems to me to be weird!
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
Watch out for a possible 1% income tax cut as well as the NI cuts.
Or maybe the 2% cut will be to income tax INSTEAD of NI??
There isn't the extra £4-5bn available to cut income tax and income tax cuts are inflationary which is a problem when the expected rate of inflation is already above the target...
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
Supposedly the prosecutors might try to get the judge removed in the Trump documents case, but it's hard for me to see how it helps in the short term - even if it works, which is naturally very hard as it should be, a new judge coming in would surely see a significant delay, with the delays thus far already making a pre election trial difficult evrn if a new judge picked up the pace, and it if Trump wins the election it won't matter who the judge is anyway.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
Sounds counter productive. There are plenty of arms manufacturers to pick from in the bloc I'm sure, but a nearby close ally being excluded from buying or selling?
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
I don't think American Samoa or other US Territories get to vote for the POTUS, so may not be quite typical.
AIUI they get to vote in the actual election not in the primaries. On a general point, the American election system seems to me to be weird!
Intricate and involved though, which is why it's great.
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
He has the world's thinnest skin, if she wins even a single state he will blow a gasket, which justifies her staying in the race this long.
Surprisingly Haley has ramped up her criticism of him, the question is whether those voting for her follow through on saying they won't back Trump - DeSantis and his supporters crumbled immediately despite also increasing his criticism of Trump after all.
She won a state - Vermont More pertinently, she was getting a steady 20 or 30% in a number of larger states. She won't get many delegates as most if the big contests have been fixed as winner takes all. But it's a lot of votes against the presumptive nominee, and quite a high proportion of them won't vote for Trump in the general.
She doesn't seem ready to fold quite yet. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/05/super-tuesday-2024/haley-campaign-speaks-00145247 "Unity is not achieved by simply claiming 'we’re united,'" she continued, an apparent reference to calls from Donald Trump and his allies for the party to join in support of him. "Today, in state after state, there remains a large block of Republican primary voters who are expressing deep concerns about Donald Trump. That is not the unity our party needs for success. Addressing those voters’ concerns will make the Republican Party and America better."..
Good. Not sure why donors would continue to fund her, but anything additional to distract Trump and delay the official point where many antiTrumpers decide to fall in line is to be lauded.
Well done to @SeaShantyIrish2 for keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered.
This is a betting site. It was founded in 2004 principally to discuss the Kerry/Bush races because there was nowhere else on the Web to discuss the polling and betting opportunities, and other discussion sites were cluttered with all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.
Astonishing we seem to have lost a bit of that.
Everyone's been asleep. And in any event, the only item of interest is how many. votes Haley gets. A respectable number, as it turns out.
Trump will be smarting.
He has the world's thinnest skin, if she wins even a single state he will blow a gasket, which justifies her staying in the race this long.
Surprisingly Haley has ramped up her criticism of him, the question is whether those voting for her follow through on saying they won't back Trump - DeSantis and his supporters crumbled immediately despite also increasing his criticism of Trump after all.
She won a state - Vermont More pertinently, she was getting a steady 20 or 30% in a number of larger states. She won't get many delegates as most if the big contests have been fixed as winner takes all. But it's a lot of votes against the presumptive nominee, and quite a high proportion of them won't vote for Trump in the general.
She doesn't seem ready to fold quite yet. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/05/super-tuesday-2024/haley-campaign-speaks-00145247 "Unity is not achieved by simply claiming 'we’re united,'" she continued, an apparent reference to calls from Donald Trump and his allies for the party to join in support of him. "Today, in state after state, there remains a large block of Republican primary voters who are expressing deep concerns about Donald Trump. That is not the unity our party needs for success. Addressing those voters’ concerns will make the Republican Party and America better."..
Good. Not sure why donors would continue to fund her, but anything additional to distract Trump and delay the official point where many antiTrumpers decide to fall in line is to be lauded.
I'm in Trump-style thin skin mode this morning. So...
"keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered."
I've been posting all sorts of voting stuff from the likes of NY Times and Luntz and Kristol for months.
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
And the 'inquiry' into Covid probably won't have reported by the next crisis; and even if it has, it will have not produced any recommendations that would help. Out inquiry is just a stupid waste of money.
The inquiry is bogged down in political trivia. The scientific bit should be done and dusted now, with clear recommendations and actions for future pandemics.
That's the point: any good learning points from the 'scientific' bit will be polluted by the political sh*t that's going on, and will get forgotten about as the political bits will take precedence.
It's exactly how not to run an inquiry into this sort of thing. People are only interested in blame, not learning lessons on how to prevent or mitigate a future epidemic. It should have been handled in the same way an AAIB or RAIB investigation would be.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
I don't think American Samoa or other US Territories get to vote for the POTUS, so may not be quite typical.
AIUI they get to vote in the actual election not in the primaries. On a general point, the American election system seems to me to be weird!
Intricate and involved though, which is why it's great.
Certainly gives opportunities for discussions, and for betting!
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
Sounds counter productive. There are plenty of arms manufacturers to pick from in the bloc I'm sure, but a nearby close ally being excluded from buying or selling?
Not really. Consider them separately. We can buy from the EU but if it does kick off, they will prioritise EU orders. We've seen similar behaviour during the Covid pandemic.
But it will be harder to win export orders because the EU will subsidise EU (aka mainly French) manufacturers.
Nicking two Labour policies might help Hunt in the short term to finance the tax cuts but it also can be seen as legitimizing Labours policies .
It does call into question the sincerity of Tory attacks on Labour policies.
Stealing policies from the other side is a grand old tradition of course. Often you don't even take a hit for it as the average person and even a more engaged person won't remember whose idea it originally was or won't care.
Occasionally they will be honest and just effectively say it's OK as an idea only if they are the ones doing it.
As David Cameron said in 2010 "Not everything [Labour] did was bad" and he'd keep the good things.
Nicking two Labour policies might help Hunt in the short term to finance the tax cuts but it also can be seen as legitimizing Labours policies .
It is very brazen but of course it means they labour have no tax raising policies, other than the meagre VAT on private schools, so if they were a real labour government they would say they need more tax and introduce a wealth tax.
Now that would be labour being labour, not mimicking the conservative fiscal rules
Tory MP Harriet Baldwin tells @NickFerrariLBC on early election speculation that she has been "operating on the assumption there was a possibility it could be on the 2nd of May, I think that's the earliest date... I've been preparing to be ready." @LBC
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
Sounds counter productive. There are plenty of arms manufacturers to pick from in the bloc I'm sure, but a nearby close ally being excluded from buying or selling?
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
I don't think American Samoa or other US Territories get to vote for the POTUS, so may not be quite typical.
AIUI they get to vote in the actual election not in the primaries. On a general point, the American election system seems to me to be weird!
Intricate and involved though, which is why it's great.
Certainly gives opportunities for discussions, and for betting!
Up to a point. Neither Primary has had much of betting interest, though the final election may.
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
Has it died or has some of it simply moved out of the centre, mimicking working patterns reflecting wfh amid other developments? A few months back I went clubbing in Peckham, went to a couple of banging clubs and came home at 5am. I don't think there were many options in Peckham at that time of night ten or fifteen years ago. I'd much rather go out somewhere that's a 10 minute bus ride away than some overpriced place in the centre of town and then a long night bus ride home with a load of drunks.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
We've seen the first happen with PPE and vaccines. The second is subsidies for home suppliers, which is also SOP for the EU.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
Seems to go wider than Trump, to be fair. The Kentucky Governor race last year, the polls were neck and neck and Beshear won quite comfortably in the end.
The Trump under-performance seems to be across the board. The last Vermont poll had him 30 points ahead.
Yes, but my point is that while his underperformance* is spectacular, it's not just him. It's a general Republican phenomenon.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
I've posted this before, but Republicans generally underperforming their polling just isn't true. (And also doesn't makes much sense when talking about primaries).
Good morning everybody!
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
I don't think American Samoa or other US Territories get to vote for the POTUS, so may not be quite typical.
AIUI they get to vote in the actual election not in the primaries. On a general point, the American election system seems to me to be weird!
Intricate and involved though, which is why it's great.
Certainly gives opportunities for discussions, and for betting!
Up to a point. Neither Primary has had much of betting interest, though the final election may.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
"We reviewed information about mammals naturally infected by highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus subtype H5N1 during 2 periods: the current panzootic (2020–2023) and previous waves of infection (2003–2019). In the current panzootic, 26 countries have reported >48 mammal species infected by H5N1 virus; in some cases, the virus has affected thousands of individual animals. The geographic area and the number of species affected by the current event are considerably larger than in previous waves of infection. The most plausible source of mammal infection in both periods appears to be close contact with infected birds, including their ingestion. Some studies, especially in the current panzootic, suggest that mammal-to-mammal transmission might be responsible for some infections; some mutations found could help this avian pathogen replicate in mammals. H5N1 virus may be changing and adapting to infect mammals. Continuous surveillance is essential to mitigate the risk for a global pandemic."
And the 'inquiry' into Covid probably won't have reported by the next crisis; and even if it has, it will have not produced any recommendations that would help. Out inquiry is just a stupid waste of money.
The inquiry is bogged down in political trivia. The scientific bit should be done and dusted now, with clear recommendations and actions for future pandemics.
If that is the case, and I would be delighted, then the gravy train should pull into the station. The rest of it is a complete waste of time and money.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
You say budget day. I say it's the day we get the 6-day decs for the first day of Cheltenham. Will Ballyburn run in the Supreme or Baring Bingham?
Nicking two Labour policies might help Hunt in the short term to finance the tax cuts but it also can be seen as legitimizing Labours policies .
It does call into question the sincerity of Tory attacks on Labour policies.
This is why Starmer not issuing a blizzard of serious policies before the election tells us next to nothing about how radical he will or will not be once in power.
Policies that please the left would risk the election. Policies that please the majority of floating voters will be stolen by the Tories. So keep a lid on it. Put no obstacle in the way of the country doing what it wants to do, which is hand the Cons their well merited thrashing.
That's the strategy. People can wibble all they like about the need to "build enthusiasm" but this can wait until after the election. Indeed it's better that way from an expectations management pov. An unenthusiastic landslide is the best of all possible worlds for Keir Starmer.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Of course.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
Nicking two Labour policies might help Hunt in the short term to finance the tax cuts but it also can be seen as legitimizing Labours policies .
It does call into question the sincerity of Tory attacks on Labour policies.
This is why Starmer not issuing a blizzard of serious policies before the election tells us next to nothing about how radical he will or will not be once in power.
Policies that please the left would risk the election. Policies that please the majority of floating voters will be stolen by the Tories. So keep a lid on it. Put no obstacle in the way of the country doing what it wants to do, which is hand the Cons their well merited thrashing.
That's the strategy. People can wibble all they like about the need to "build enthusiasm" but this can wait until after the election. Indeed it's better that way from an expectations management pov. An unenthusiastic landslide is the best of all possible worlds for Keir Starmer.
We saw that in 2019, when CCHQ systematically analysed and adopted every popular Labour announcement from its near miss in 2017.
It seems we are going to focus on hosting major sporting tournaments and it could have a big economic boost. That seems like a good idea to me. Much to my surprise all the ones we have done recently have been very successful, maybe because unlike other countries we have been sensible regarding the scale of the events and not made them some grand enormous event and expense.
Interestingly More or Less did a bit on why our large capital projects overrun both in time and money so badly. Apparently compared to other countries they don't. Everyone is hopeless. HS2 however was awful even by international standards
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Of course.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
On board what? The UK is committed to their defence anyway through NATO (for now). Nothing the EU decides on prioritising their own arms industry changes that.
80% of defence spending in the EU by 2035 is the target but it has to get past all 27 members without a veto.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
This feels significant for the Trump Vs Biden vote.
If Trump is consistently underperforming primary polls, by varying degrees, then does that mean:
1) There are shy 'anti-Trump' voters? 2) The polling of primaries is consistently rubbish, but the general election polling doesn't suffer from the same effects?
Intuitively, I can see why - in an incredibly divided America - there may be people in traditionally Republican suburbs who can't face voting for Trump but wouldn't admit to it to pollsters.
Republicans underperforming in the mid terms is further evidence.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
When you adjust for population, Westminster is absolutely miles ahead of anywhere else. Is it pickpockets and muggings of tourists ? They're council tax is extraordinarily cheap for the property values there, perhaps they need to raise it and spend a bit more on police for the borough ?
Absolutely bonkers Cons voters' desire, meanwhile, to prioritise defence spending over anything else.
All those retired, and serving colonels - Richard Kemp looking at you - who want us to get back to some imagined and now long gone mastery over the waves and beyond.
Supposedly the prosecutors might try to get the judge removed in the Trump documents case, but it's hard for me to see how it helps in the short term - even if it works, which is naturally very hard as it should be, a new judge coming in would surely see a significant delay, with the delays thus far already making a pre election trial difficult evrn if a new judge picked up the pace, and it if Trump wins the election it won't matter who the judge is anyway.
She has been taking the piss. It's a lose/lose kind of situation; either way there's significant delay.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Of course.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
On board what? The UK is committed to their defence anyway through NATO (for now). Nothing the EU decides on prioritising their own arms industry changes that.
80% of defence spending in the EU by 2035 is the target but it has to get past all 27 members without a veto.
On board an EU based defence. If Trump is elected we are going to need it. I don’t believe NATO would survive that in its current form.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
We've seen the first happen with PPE and vaccines. The second is subsidies for home suppliers, which is also SOP for the EU.
There are a few things being proposed: 1) to increase the amount of joint procurement by EU member states (from current 18% to 60% in 2035) in order to decrease costs and increase inter-operability. 2) to increase the amount of arms bought within the EU from the current 20% to 60% by 2035. 3) for the EU to collect data on stock and production within the EU 4) to have a mechanism in a crisis where companies in the EU can be forced to change their production and who they sell to.
Also a proposal to use the 500 million euros (not much really) a year the EU currently has to encourage joint procurement and buying within the EU.
Of course, none of these proposals are directed at the UK - in fact only the possibility of the unreliability of future US supplies is given as an additional motive, apart from the main motive which is to try and ensure Europe can produce the weapons it needs to defend itself against Russia.
The proposals are non-binding, so it's all aspirational. In addition, member states aren't going to agree to them (especially 3). Overall, I think calling the Daily Mail piece 'nonsense' is fair.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
This feels significant for the Trump Vs Biden vote.
If Trump is consistently underperforming primary polls, by varying degrees, then does that mean:
1) There are shy 'anti-Trump' voters? 2) The polling of primaries is consistently rubbish, but the general election polling doesn't suffer from the same effects?
Intuitively, I can see why - in an incredibly divided America - there may be people in traditionally Republican suburbs who can't face voting for Trump but wouldn't admit to it to pollsters.
Republicans underperforming in the mid terms is further evidence.
Wonder if it's time to bet on Biden...
Not entirely consistently, which is why the effects are somewhat unpredictable.
But polling has been of very variable quality - I think because it's genuinely difficult for even well resourced pollsters to reach a representative sample of voters.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Of course.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
I would have thought that a lot of EU militaries (who aren’t major manufacturers looking to bolster their figures like France and Germany) might raise an eyebrow before pointing out that there is a lot of kit (whether planes, guns, missiles, armour and tech) that they use, want to use or cannot be replicated in a sensible timeframe and cost, from the US, UK, Switzerland, South Korea for example and if they start putting trade restrictions in place then those restrictions work both ways.
1. Trump ineligible to stand due to his insurrection actives. 2. Fails to win the nomination. 3. Convicted, jailed and dumped by the GOP. 4. Kicks the bucket before the election. 5. Beaten at the election on November 5th.
It's going to have to be 5. isn't it? Probably for the best all things considered.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Of course.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
On board what? The UK is committed to their defence anyway through NATO (for now). Nothing the EU decides on prioritising their own arms industry changes that.
80% of defence spending in the EU by 2035 is the target but it has to get past all 27 members without a veto.
On board an EU based defence. If Trump is elected we are going to need it. I don’t believe NATO would survive that in its current form.
The UK is not on board now. They withdrew from EUMS and were never in PESCO.
If NATO falls apart (must be >50% chance at the moment) then the UK's choice is a new bilateral arrangement with the EU or with the US. I'm not sure who will deliver the harder fucking.
Very strong Trump performance, of course. However, he does seem to have under-performed compared to the polling. In Vermont, for example, the most recent poll had him well ahead. The big majorities he gets tend to obscure this discrepancy but it could matter a fair bit come the big one.
This feels significant for the Trump Vs Biden vote.
If Trump is consistently underperforming primary polls, by varying degrees, then does that mean:
1) There are shy 'anti-Trump' voters? 2) The polling of primaries is consistently rubbish, but the general election polling doesn't suffer from the same effects?
Intuitively, I can see why - in an incredibly divided America - there may be people in traditionally Republican suburbs who can't face voting for Trump but wouldn't admit to it to pollsters.
Republicans underperforming in the mid terms is further evidence.
"Ironically, after the election, a narrative emerged that 2022 polling was actually too good for Republicans — a claim that our data doesn’t bear out, either. While the polls in a few closely watched races — like Arizona’s governorship and Pennsylvania’s Senate seat — were biased toward Republicans, the polls overall still had a bit of a bias toward Democrats."
Comments
with 38% reporting
Adam Schiff
Democrat 1,105,697 36.9%
Steve Garvey
Republican 868,808 29.0%
Katie Porter
Democrat 446,765 14.9%
Barbara Lee
Democrat 214,301 7.2%
Total reported
2,994,984
SSI - AP has called Schiff as making Top Two, pretty obviously as #1.
And hard to believe that Porter can catch up with Garvey.
Note that neither Porter nor Lee are leading in any county.
RNC resolution to ban paying Trump’s legal bills is ‘dead’
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4511516-rnc-resolution-to-ban-paying-trumps-legal-bills-is-dead/
Dog-whistling as when Trump gave killer Nazis a big blow after Charlottesville.
There is something wrong at the New York Times
From presidential polls to refusing to report on Trump’s stumbles, things aren’t adding up at the Gray Lady
https://www.salon.com/2024/03/05/there-is-something-at-the-new-york-times/
...How did the New York Times come up with a polling sample that included 36 percent rural voters when the 2020 proportion of rural voters was 19 percent? Somehow, the poll’s sample of female voters was equally skewed. The poll found Trump winning the female vote by one percent, when Biden carried women in 2020 by 11 points. ..
..The poll shows that Trump still has the support of nearly every Republican who voted for him in 2020 — this in the face of the fact that between 30 and 40 percent of primary voters have chosen another candidate than Trump. Those people are not poll respondents. They’re voters. The Times/Siena poll also somehow comes up with 12 percent support among Democrats for Rep. Dean Phillips, who has yet to get more than two percent of the vote in a primary. Even Phillips himself posted a tweet that said “When the NYT/Siena poll shows me at 12%, you better believe it’s flawed. Only 5% even know who I am.” The poll also shows that among respondents who described themselves as unhappy with both candidates, they favor Biden over Trump by 12 points. So Biden has the utterly disaffected vote and carries independents by four points, and he’s losing to Trump by four points?
It just doesn’t add up.
Why is the New York Times missing the red flags in its own polls? More important, why has the paper decided to give its own deeply biased poll results such heavy play? ..
Yes: 58%
No: 39%
Does Trump?
Yes: 76%
No: 22%
https://twitter.com/akarl_smith/status/1765149619976028357
California GOP primary voters: Which candidate has the physical and mental health needed to serve as president?
Both of them: 47%
Only Trump: 32%
Only Haley: 16%
Neither: 5%
https://twitter.com/akarl_smith/status/1765143518865953022
So it will be a real "play ball!" contest in the Fall, a real pitchers's duel . . . with the pitchers throwing bean balls at one another.
Note that, like Hershel Walker of Georgia, Steve Harvey was BIG time sports star, in his case for the Los Angeles Dodgers.
Definitely not recommended, but it does illustrate that even extreme vaccination seems pretty safe.
Adaptive immune responses are larger and functionally preserved in a hypervaccinated individual
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(24)00134-8/fulltext
Here, we report on a 62-year-old male hypervaccinated individual from Magdeburg, Germany (HIM), who deliberately and for private reasons received 217 vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 within a period of 29 months (figure A; appendix 1 tab 1). HIM's hypervaccination occurred outside of a clinical study context and against national vaccination recommendations. Evidence for 130 vaccinations in a 9 month period was collected by the public prosecutor of Magdeburg, Germany, who opened an investigation of this case with the allegation of fraud, but criminal charges were not filed. 108 vaccinations are individually recorded and partly overlap with the total of 130 prosecutor-confirmed vaccinations (appendix 2 p 12). To investigate the immunological consequences of hypervaccination in this unique situation, we submitted an analysis proposal to HIM via the public prosecutor. HIM then actively and voluntarily consented to provide medical information and donate blood and saliva. This procedure was approved by the local Ethics Committee of the University Hospital of Erlangen, Germany. Throughout the entire hypervaccination schedule HIM did not report any vaccination-related side effects. From November 2019, to October 2023, 62 routine clinical chemistry parameters showed no abnormalities attributable to hypervaccination ..
I quite like Schiff, but this seemed a little off as a tactic for reducing the chances if his Democratic opponents.
Morning Consult
Biden 44
Trump 43
YouGov
Biden 48
Trump 52
TIPP Insights
Biden 43
Trump 42
for completeness
Also for completeness the latest German poll has the AfD on 17% 6 points lower than the last German poll you posted.
There has been a lot of movement on Biden and Obama overnight.
How Haley voters turn out in the general election could be decisive in the likely Biden/Trump contest.
She got pretty good results in some of the swing states.
There is a tendency to think of the Palestine issue as an Arab one whereas in fact it is a Muslim one (according to pious Muslims, there can be no compromise over Palestine and Israel cannot exist).
PS Yes, its MrEd / TKC back again.
Sounds a fun caucus.
"The Voice of Reason, not Treason" could have been a great campaign slogan.
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1765128349473554768
If the Old Bill or Grim Reaper get Trump then she would get the nomination.
She was right to stay in the race.
It's almost as though people are scared to admit they won't vote for them, even in polls.
*Autocorrect tried to make that 'underpants.' Make of that what you will...
Feb 25-28 Beacon Research/Shaw
Biden 47 Trump 49
Biden 42 Haley 50
Biden 38 Trump 41 Kennedy 13 West 3 Stein 2
Biden 35 Haley 28 Kennedy 24 West 5 Stein 2
btw that latest Morning Consult with Biden 1 ahead seems to be the first Biden lead for Morning Consult in 18 head to head national polls (since 8th Jan). Probably just noise.
I'm not sure any of us are perfectly balanced. He might feel he needs to overcompensate because no-one else is making the case.
FWIW I think it shows Trump is still great value to win the popular vote at 4.5 on Betfair.
I believe we already have some stockpile of vaccine. And monitoring is a bit better than it was pre-pandemic.
It's into mainland Antarctic now. Not good news.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/26/scientists-confirm-first-cases-of-bird-flu-on-mainland-antarctica
Whereas in Virginia, he was 20% off.
As for the autocorrect, that Depends.
Today’s Budget should be the final chapter of fourteen years of Tory economic failure.
Taxes are rising, prices are going up in the shops and we have been hit by recession.
Britain is worse off under the Conservatives. Nothing Jeremy Hunt says or does today can change that.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
I’m not sure about the Republicans generally under performing. One thing that has struck me. relatively low numbers of people actually voting. An example, yesterday was on the TV when the reporter was excitedly telling us that you could see people queueing up to vote behind him. In actual fact, during the report about three people actually went into the voting area. The ultimate example was perhaps American Samoa, where I think 91 people actually voted in the Democratic primary; 51 for unknown, Jason Palmer, and 40 for President Biden. I know American Samoa is a small territory….. I think 50,000 people …. but that does seem an extraordinarily small turnout.
Surprisingly Haley has ramped up her criticism of him, the question is whether those voting for her follow through on saying they won't back Trump - DeSantis and his supporters crumbled immediately despite also increasing his criticism of Trump after all.
That requires a lot more commitment.
Or maybe the 2% cut will be to income tax INSTEAD of NI??
More pertinently, she was getting a steady 20 or 30% in a number of larger states. She won't get many delegates as most if the big contests have been fixed as winner takes all. But it's a lot of votes against the presumptive nominee, and quite a high proportion of them won't vote for Trump in the general.
She doesn't seem ready to fold quite yet.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/05/super-tuesday-2024/haley-campaign-speaks-00145247
"Unity is not achieved by simply claiming 'we’re united,'" she continued, an apparent reference to calls from Donald Trump and his allies for the party to join in support of him. "Today, in state after state, there remains a large block of Republican primary voters who are expressing deep concerns about Donald Trump. That is not the unity our party needs for success. Addressing those voters’ concerns will make the Republican Party and America better."..
...
The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
"keeping us focused on the US election - seemingly the only one who's bothered."
I've been posting all sorts of voting stuff from the likes of NY Times and Luntz and Kristol for months.
It's exactly how not to run an inquiry into this sort of thing. People are only interested in blame, not learning lessons on how to prevent or mitigate a future epidemic. It should have been handled in the same way an AAIB or RAIB investigation would be.
But it will be harder to win export orders because the EU will subsidise EU (aka mainly French) manufacturers.
Occasionally they will be honest and just effectively say it's OK as an idea only if they are the ones doing it.
As David Cameron said in 2010 "Not everything [Labour] did was bad" and he'd keep the good things.
Now that would be labour being labour, not mimicking the conservative fiscal rules
Tory MP Harriet Baldwin tells @NickFerrariLBC on early election speculation that she has been "operating on the assumption there was a possibility it could be on the 2nd of May, I think that's the earliest date... I've been preparing to be ready."
@LBC
Furthermore they are in NATO with us
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/tv/how-nightlife-died-in-sadiq-khan-s-london/ar-BB1jnKvq?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=94d75fab702947668e4a03fd492a61d2&ei=20
https://wmgaragedoors.co.uk/a-comprehensive-crime-report/
Hat-tip the Daily Star!
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed?
Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
Policies that please the left would risk the election. Policies that please the majority of floating voters will be stolen by the Tories. So keep a lid on it. Put no obstacle in the way of the country doing what it wants to do, which is hand the Cons their well merited thrashing.
That's the strategy. People can wibble all they like about the need to "build enthusiasm" but this can wait until after the election. Indeed it's better that way from an expectations management pov. An unenthusiastic landslide is the best of all possible worlds for Keir Starmer.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2024/03/06/what-now-for-scottish-juries/#respond
Interestingly More or Less did a bit on why our large capital projects overrun both in time and money so badly. Apparently compared to other countries they don't. Everyone is hopeless. HS2 however was awful even by international standards
80% of defence spending in the EU by 2035 is the target but it has to get past all 27 members without a veto.
If Trump is consistently underperforming primary polls, by varying degrees, then does that mean:
1) There are shy 'anti-Trump' voters?
2) The polling of primaries is consistently rubbish, but the general election polling doesn't suffer from the same effects?
Intuitively, I can see why - in an incredibly divided America - there may be people in traditionally Republican suburbs who can't face voting for Trump but wouldn't admit to it to pollsters.
Republicans underperforming in the mid terms is further evidence.
Wonder if it's time to bet on Biden...
They're council tax is extraordinarily cheap for the property values there, perhaps they need to raise it and spend a bit more on police for the borough ?
Can we have a (longish, that's fine) thread header on the gross iniquity, not to say Dickensian attitude of the Advertising Standards Authority.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-68478328
Banning a Calvin Klein advert ft FKA Twigs because two (2!) people complained about it.
What fucked up kind of a mad world are we living in right now.
All those retired, and serving colonels - Richard Kemp looking at you - who want us to get back to some imagined and now long gone mastery over the waves and beyond.
It's bonkers.
It's a lose/lose kind of situation; either way there's significant delay.
1) to increase the amount of joint procurement by EU member states (from current 18% to 60% in 2035) in order to decrease costs and increase inter-operability.
2) to increase the amount of arms bought within the EU from the current 20% to 60% by 2035.
3) for the EU to collect data on stock and production within the EU
4) to have a mechanism in a crisis where companies in the EU can be forced to change their production and who they sell to.
Also a proposal to use the 500 million euros (not much really) a year the EU currently has to encourage joint procurement and buying within the EU.
Of course, none of these proposals are directed at the UK - in fact only the possibility of the unreliability of future US supplies is given as an additional motive, apart from the main motive which is to try and ensure Europe can produce the weapons it needs to defend itself against Russia.
The proposals are non-binding, so it's all aspirational. In addition, member states aren't going to agree to them (especially 3). Overall, I think calling the Daily Mail piece 'nonsense' is fair.
But polling has been of very variable quality - I think because it's genuinely difficult for even well resourced pollsters to reach a representative sample of voters.
1. Trump ineligible to stand due to his insurrection actives.
2. Fails to win the nomination.
3. Convicted, jailed and dumped by the GOP.
4. Kicks the bucket before the election.
5. Beaten at the election on November 5th.
It's going to have to be 5. isn't it? Probably for the best all things considered.
If NATO falls apart (must be >50% chance at the moment) then the UK's choice is a new bilateral arrangement with the EU or with the US. I'm not sure who will deliver the harder fucking.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/2022-election-polling-accuracy/
"Ironically, after the election, a narrative emerged that 2022 polling was actually too good for Republicans — a claim that our data doesn’t bear out, either. While the polls in a few closely watched races — like Arizona’s governorship and Pennsylvania’s Senate seat — were biased toward Republicans, the polls overall still had a bit of a bias toward Democrats."