politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest GOP debate changes nothing – the front runners are still Trump, Rubio and Cruz
I didn’t stay up for the latest GOP debate overnight and have yet to watch the entire event. So my comments here are based on the betting markets and what respected US commentators thought.
Thanks again to Speedy for the excellent pithy summaries last night. OGH's conclusions sound right though I wonder if it isn't tuning into Cruz/Trump with Rubio fading.
O/T: a wistful piece by a Corbyn fan on how difficult it is to discuss him sensibly - though I think it's a particular example of a general media phenomenon:
The book argues: “If we assume the polls were as wrong throughout the parliament as they were on election day and adjust the voting intention polling data accordingly, then the polling crossover [ie Conservatives overtaking Labour] occurred sometime around July 2013, with the Conservative lead slowly but steadily increasing after that. Indeed Labour led and probably only narrowly for around 18 months between roughly March 2012 and July 2013.”
The Times reports today that even if Cameron fails to block migrants receiving in-work benefits for four years In would still narrowly win EU ref according to a Comres poll for Open Europe. However if he fails to secure protections for countries outside the eurozone that would lead to an Out win
Thanks again to Speedy for the excellent pithy summaries last night. OGH's conclusions sound right though I wonder if it isn't tuning into Cruz/Trump with Rubio fading.
O/T: a wistful piece by a Corbyn fan on how difficult it is to discuss him sensibly - though I think it's a particular example of a general media phenomenon:
The book argues: “If we assume the polls were as wrong throughout the parliament as they were on election day and adjust the voting intention polling data accordingly, then the polling crossover [ie Conservatives overtaking Labour] occurred sometime around July 2013, with the Conservative lead slowly but steadily increasing after that. Indeed Labour led and probably only narrowly for around 18 months between roughly March 2012 and July 2013.”
I think that's a dangerous assumption to make. I suspect crossover occurred later than that and the pollsters just didn't believe what they were seeing.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Do you think the Guardian is an example of our "gloriously unfree media", Nick?
Serious reply FWIW: I wouldn't say unfree, but yes, it shares in the general crapness of our media compared with e.g. the German and even the US media. It is very difficult to get a serious discussion in the UK media - they always focus on a sensational trivial remark from an otherwise interesting interview (the "stab him from the front" example that he gives is a good one) or they start from the position "I'm going to try to persuade readers of a point of view" (Ambrose Evans and Polly Toynbee are examples). The sort of "I'm going to explain the situation and set out the pros and cons" piece that you get in the Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Neue Zuercher Zeitung or even the Washington Post almost doesn't happen in Britain. We think it's boring and deride it.
The effect is that politicians become extremely defensive - the main priority in an interview is to get one line across and not screw up with some comment that can be taken out of context. The victim is the level of public debate, which is seriously awful.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
I thought you wanted him to nuke the "hand-wringers"...
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
The way a Trump presidency approached a wide range of foreign policy issues would have a major and direct impact on all of us; as would his management of the US economy. he may not press the nuclear button - though you would not put it past him - but he can do immense and long-lasting damage without getting to that point.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Do you think the Guardian is an example of our "gloriously unfree media", Nick?
Serious reply FWIW: I wouldn't say unfree, but yes, it shares in the general crapness of our media compared with e.g. the German and even the US media. It is very difficult to get a serious discussion in the UK media - they always focus on a sensational trivial remark from an otherwise interesting interview (the "stab him from the front" example that he gives is a good one) or they start from the position "I'm going to try to persuade readers of a point of view" (Ambrose Evans and Polly Toynbee are examples). The sort of "I'm going to explain the situation and set out the pros and cons" piece that you get in the Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Neue Zuercher Zeitung or even the Washington Post almost doesn't happen in Britain. We think it's boring and deride it.
The effect is that politicians become extremely defensive - the main priority in an interview is to get one line across and not screw up with some comment that can be taken out of context. The victim is the level of public debate, which is seriously awful.
don't disagree and fwiw from my point of view when I respond to eg. Guardian surveys I always tell them not to conflate opinion with editorial. The sort of "on the one hand..." kind of piece is tricky if you allow your editorial opinions to encroach.
Plus of course please don't fall into the trap (even if you are using it as a shorthand) of criticising the public, which is what a criticism of "public debate" of course is doing.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
Are they?. I saw some polling for ITV that said the debates over here were crucial... and I think that's right.. It showed Miliband up as a dud and not someone the voters thought as Prime Ministerial calibre, and eventually they will do the same for Trump.
From what I have read here, it would seem that Trump is all blather and no substance.. pandering to peoples worst fears. He could be the Daily Mail in human form.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Depends what your priorities are. Maybe upsetting people who wring their hands is priority number one.
If Trump, Rubio and Cruz are the front runners, that means that Rubio and Cruz are the front runners. Trump is not a front runner. Trump is not going to be the candidate. Trump is not going to be the President. Trump is a giga-booliak. If the GOP actually does the most stupid thing it's ever done in decades and selects Trump as its candidate for POTUS, we will have to interpret that to mean that it does not want to win the Presidency for the next four years, and, presumably, wants Hillary Clinton to win.
Perhaps the members of the Republican Party are anticipating more fun from the prospect of impeaching Hillary for various misdemeanours than from the prospect of a Trump presidency.
Do you think the Guardian is an example of our "gloriously unfree media", Nick?
Serious reply FWIW: I wouldn't say unfree, but yes, it shares in the general crapness of our media compared with e.g. the German and even the US media. It is very difficult to get a serious discussion in the UK media - they always focus on a sensational trivial remark from an otherwise interesting interview (the "stab him from the front" example that he gives is a good one) or they start from the position "I'm going to try to persuade readers of a point of view" (Ambrose Evans and Polly Toynbee are examples). The sort of "I'm going to explain the situation and set out the pros and cons" piece that you get in the Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Neue Zuercher Zeitung or even the Washington Post almost doesn't happen in Britain. We think it's boring and deride it.
The effect is that politicians become extremely defensive - the main priority in an interview is to get one line across and not screw up with some comment that can be taken out of context. The victim is the level of public debate, which is seriously awful.
Oh come off it Nick, you only have to watch PMQs to see the standard of debate amongst MPs. Stop blaming the media for the uselessness of politicians, you only have yourselves to blame for the way the public views you.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
I'd agree there - and it did for the other candidates in the Labour leadership race. Burnham at his worst flippy-floppy and Yvette saying nothing.
Since the Tories don't run elections like this - I wonder if they'll be another conference speech contest as per 2005 or a TV head to head or a whole new system with more than two final candidates
Are they?. I saw some polling for ITV that said the debates over here were crucial... and I think that's right.. It showed Miliband up as a dud and not someone the voters thought as Prime Ministerial calibre, and eventually they will do the same for Trump.
From what I have read here, it would seem that Trump is all blather and no substance.. pandering to peoples worst fears. He could be the Daily Mail in human form.
@Kevin_Maguire: Ever wonder why Michael Gove looks so glum? Headline on wife Sarah Vine's Mail column: "Sorry chaps but women love sleep FAR more than sex!"
The personal abuse of the Labour leader has also been used against Blair, Brown and Corbyn, and doubtless would have been much the same under, say, David Miliband, except with bananas in place of bacon sandwiches. The crucial factor was Messina's work in dissecting and micro-targeting which voters to tell "Miliband is a twat" or "Miliband is an SNP puppet" or whatever.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
Of course it is unlikely but Trump would be the president most likely to press the nuclear button of any since Hiroshima
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Depends what your priorities are. Maybe upsetting people who wring their hands is priority number one.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
Trump ain't gonna be president, and Armageddon sick and tired of people pretending he might.
JeremyCorbyn4PM This Monday will mark 100 days since JC was elected leader. What was your highlight? Use #jez100 we'll RT our fav https://t.co/k65j18CUnE
Do you think the Guardian is an example of our "gloriously unfree media", Nick?
Serious reply FWIW: I wouldn't say unfree, but yes, it shares in the general crapness of our media compared with e.g. the German and even the US media. It is very difficult to get a serious discussion in the UK media - they always focus on a sensational trivial remark from an otherwise interesting interview (the "stab him from the front" example that he gives is a good one) or they start from the position "I'm going to try to persuade readers of a point of view" (Ambrose Evans and Polly Toynbee are examples). The sort of "I'm going to explain the situation and set out the pros and cons" piece that you get in the Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Neue Zuercher Zeitung or even the Washington Post almost doesn't happen in Britain. We think it's boring and deride it.
The effect is that politicians become extremely defensive - the main priority in an interview is to get one line across and not screw up with some comment that can be taken out of context. The victim is the level of public debate, which is seriously awful.
Oh come off it Nick, you only have to watch PMQs to see the standard of debate amongst MPs. Stop blaming the media for the uselessness of politicians, you only have yourselves to blame for the way the public views you.
That's not entirely fair. PMQs is a spectator sport for the politically obsessed. It's not supposed to be high quality debate.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
@Kevin_Maguire: Ever wonder why Michael Gove looks so glum? Headline on wife Sarah Vine's Mail column: "Sorry chaps but women love sleep FAR more than sex!"
So do men.
But I see that she's been scheduling sex. This is called "doing it wrong".
@tnewtondunn: The excellent @Dannythefink suggests David Cameron should make Boris Foreign Sec in exchange for his EU referendum support. He may have to.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Fair play to Donald, I'm beginning to like him even more
The personal abuse of the Labour leader has also been used against Blair, Brown and Corbyn, and doubtless would have been much the same under, say, David Miliband, except with bananas in place of bacon sandwiches. The crucial factor was Messina's work in dissecting and micro-targeting which voters to tell "Miliband is a twat" or "Miliband is an SNP puppet" or whatever.
I know this has been your pet meme since the election, but the simple reality is, Labour were still unpopular and Ed was never perceived as a viable alternative to lead the country.
Re the GOP debates - there was a clip on Sky earlier with all the candidates either agreeing the Donald or deliberately avoiding taking him on directly - a variant of I Agree With Nick meme, since attacking him isn't working.
I scanned @Speedy's comments but didn't pick it up there - anyone else notice this?
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
If one were unlucky enough to survive, rationing a bit of rat or diseased dog for supper would be uppermost in one's mind.
@Kevin_Maguire: Ever wonder why Michael Gove looks so glum? Headline on wife Sarah Vine's Mail column: "Sorry chaps but women love sleep FAR more than sex!"
So do men.
But I see that she's been scheduling sex. This is called "doing it wrong".
The older I've got, the more I view sleep now as I did sex in my youth.
You should have seen me last night, I was at it for six straight hours.
The personal abuse of the Labour leader has also been used against Blair, Brown and Corbyn, and doubtless would have been much the same under, say, David Miliband, except with bananas in place of bacon sandwiches. The crucial factor was Messina's work in dissecting and micro-targeting which voters to tell "Miliband is a twat" or "Miliband is an SNP puppet" or whatever.
I know this has been your pet meme since the election, but the simple reality is, Labour were still unpopular and Ed was never perceived as a viable alternative to lead the country.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Donald Trump's wives have been mostly immigrants, haven't they?
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Fair play to Donald, I'm beginning to like him even more
He said he'd be dating Ivanka, if she wasn't his daughter.
I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.
If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.
One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.
The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.
The monarch is apolitical. The private audience with the PM will be a different matter.
As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.
In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.
I was recently granted a rare glimpse behind the official façade of the EU when I met with its Trade Commissioner in her Brussels office. I was there to discuss the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the controversial treaty currently under negotiation between the EU and the USA.
Yet when I asked the trade commissioner how she could continue her persistent promotion of the deal in the face of such massive public opposition, her response came back icy cold: “I do not take my mandate from the European people.”
British officials could take part in EU plan for powerful new border guard with powers to deploy without a nation's consent, sparking row over sovereignty
Armed German border guards marching into Greece or Hungary against the will of their governments, what could possibly go wrong ?! The Czech border with Germany might be particularly sensitive!
The personal abuse of the Labour leader has also been used against Blair, Brown and Corbyn, and doubtless would have been much the same under, say, David Miliband, except with bananas in place of bacon sandwiches. The crucial factor was Messina's work in dissecting and micro-targeting which voters to tell "Miliband is a twat" or "Miliband is an SNP puppet" or whatever.
I know this has been your pet meme since the election, but the simple reality is, Labour were still unpopular and Ed was never perceived as a viable alternative to lead the country.
Lynton Crosby agrees Facebook and YouTube was key.
Having a good leader and good narrative also helped.
Somewhat ridiculously, I had to Google it, and then type in "www.weebly.com/editor/logout.php".
Pisses me off when sites hide things. Blogspot did the same (still no idea how to log out directly, but as it's Google-linked I can just sign out elsewhere and refresh to check it worked).
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Fair play to Donald, I'm beginning to like him even more
He said he'd be dating Ivanka, if she wasn't his daughter.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
If one were unlucky enough to survive, rationing a bit of rat or diseased dog for supper would be uppermost in one's mind.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Donald Trump's wives have been mostly immigrants, haven't they?
Amid widespread speculation of a front bench reshuffle, the Labour leader has handed responsibility for the May elections to his close ally Jon Trickett, the shadow communities and local government secretary.
The move is being seen as a “clear attempt” to ensure the party fights an anti-austerity campaign amid fears councillors will abandon Mr Corbyn's policies and quietly campaign under their own platform.
Mr Trickett opposes Trident renewal, austerity cuts and Syrian air strikes – positions adopted by Mr Corbyn but rejected by many shadow cabinet ministers. He also informally advised Mr Corbyn during his leadership campaign and has called for a more democratic approach to policymaking.
Mr. W, it'd be a bit odd if Charles' first experience of looking over government papers was after he become king, I think.
Republic are just whining, as usual.
Quite so.
The surprise in this story is that anyone is surprised. Any cursory glance at post Georgian constitutional history would indicate that the present situation is the norm.
It does look like death by a thousand cuts for sane Labour.
The danger, well, one of them, is that, like Miliband, mid-term blues mean Labour do alright in some elections, giving the sheep of Labour an excuse not to defenestrate Corbyn (or even attempt to do so).
The greatest danger, of course, is that Corbyn becomes PM.
Edited extra bit: Mr. W, was mildly surprised the BBC bothered reporting it.
Is there any chance whatever that Dave will complete his rounds of Euro persuasion efforts, come up empty, and decide that he will actually then join the Out camp? If he had a public epiphany and said 'I was in favour of remaining but have become persuaded that there is no political flexibility to move away from 'Ever Closer' so on balance I think it is better to leave and control our own destiny. I have always said I would take this view if my renegotiation efforts were frustrated and I intend to keep my word'.
He'd be a hero in his own party and would then win the referendum.
Remarkably, bigger sums were to come. About an hour later, we came to Lot 70: a 26-inch model of an American bald eagle – a gift to Mrs Thatcher from President Reagan. It was expected to fetch £5-8,000. Guess the winning bid.
No? It was £266,500.
This was, in short, a roaringly successful sell-off of assets. I’m sure their former owner would have considered it a fitting tribute.
I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.
If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.
One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.
The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.
The monarch is apolitical. The private audience with the PM will be a different matter.
As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.
In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.
For HMQ it was ever thus so most people don't have a problem with it.
For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.
William - great bloke, it seems, but not unlike millions of other young men and I can see no reason, as heir to the throne (and eventual King), helicopter pilot, occasional boozer, polo player, father, Boujis-frequenter, he should get such access.
In a letter to EU leaders, Mr Tusk said that Britain's demands for EU reform will be the sole topic for discussion at a dinner between the 28 leaders...
"As I set out in my letter, we have achieved significant progress in negotiations; however we are still far from an agreement on several topics.
"This Thursday we will need to focus especially on the most controversial ones. The stakes are so high that we cannot escape a serious debate with no taboos."
what are they expecting? Charles to take no interest, then find himself flung in at the deep end on his first day in the job, after decades of waiting?
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
Of course it is unlikely but Trump would be the president most likely to press the nuclear button of any since Hiroshima
Errr no. Trump is a traditional America first non interventionist, good reasons that the people in Syria and Iraq, as well as Eastern Ukraine, are cheering him on. With Trump, Paul and Cruz there it is good to see neocon crazies have their barking mad foreign policy positions torn to pieces. Looks like WWIII will be postponed.
Anyway if you knew what you were talking about LBJ is the only President who came close to using nuclear weapons. A story and President that Trump's consigliere Roger Stone has written extensively on.
Thanks again to Speedy for the excellent pithy summaries last night. OGH's conclusions sound right though I wonder if it isn't tuning into Cruz/Trump with Rubio fading.
O/T: a wistful piece by a Corbyn fan on how difficult it is to discuss him sensibly - though I think it's a particular example of a general media phenomenon:
Re the GOP, it does look that way at the moment. Will Rubio the latest in the line of obviously-the-best (from a UK perspective) candidates that just doesn't click with the American selectorate?
Re that piece of OJ's, if you elect someone from beyond the pale they won't be treated as though they were within it. Becoming Leader of the Opposition does usually confer a kind of respectability and stature that makes news coverage more considered (not necessarily less hostile!) I think it's unsurprising that that isn't happening in Corbyn's case.
Meh, I'm struggling to express myself. What I'm trying to say is that Corbyn and his followers have an extreme case of having to fight for the right to be heard.
I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.
If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.
One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.
The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.
The monarch is apolitical. The private audience with the PM will be a different matter.
As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.
In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.
For HMQ it was ever thus so most people don't have a problem with it.
For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.
William - great bloke, it seems, but not unlike millions of other young men and I can see no reason, as heir to the throne (and eventual King), helicopter pilot, occasional boozer, polo player, father, Boujis-frequenter, he should get such access.
Not sure about his counsel or advice, either.
The Queen had access to state papers during her fathers reign as did her mother. In broad terms such regular access began with Prince Albert although there was some initial resistance to such a move.
Whether as monarch Charles's advice and counsel would wise or not is largely irrelevant. As monarch he may give it. The government may also ignore it.
what are they expecting? Charles to take no interest, then find himself flung in at the deep end on his first day in the job, after decades of waiting?
Some may be hoping so.
Clearly it is wiser to have a monarch who is across the issues of the day and able to offer an informed perspective to the Prime Minister of the day.
Republicans and dullard malcontents will seek any opportunity, however misguided, to chip away at our monarchy. They will fail.
I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.
If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.
One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.
The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.
The monarch is apolitical. The private audience with the PM will be a different matter.
As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.
In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.
For HMQ it was ever thus so most people don't have a problem with it.
For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.
William - great bloke, it seems, but not unlike millions of other young men and I can see no reason, as heir to the throne (and eventual King), helicopter pilot, occasional boozer, polo player, father, Boujis-frequenter, he should get such access.
Not sure about his counsel or advice, either.
The Queen had access to state papers during her fathers reign as did her mother. In broad terms such regular access began with Prince Albert although there was some initial resistance to such a move.
Whether as monarch Charles's advice and counsel would wise or not is largely irrelevant. As monarch he may give it. The government may also ignore it.
Times move on, Jack.
In my mind is a picture, shown in all the media, of William being manhandled into a car after a night out because he is so drunk he can't stand up on his own.
Some years ago the decision was made to demystify, demythify the Royal Family. They can't have their cake and eat it. Either they are a distant presence opining on events within their kingdom, or they are one of us (as they are trying to be now) in which case what's with the private audience with the PM?
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Fair play to Donald, I'm beginning to like him even more
He said he'd be dating Ivanka, if she wasn't his daughter.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Fair play to Donald, I'm beginning to like him even more
He said he'd be dating Ivanka, if she wasn't his daughter.
Last night on Newsnight.
Evan Davis: Isn't that a bit creepy?
Coulter: Jeez, have you Brits lost your sense of humour?
Evan Davis: Do you think terms such as r*ghead and sand jockey are helpful to political debate?
Coulter: Jeez, have you Brits lost your sense of humour?
I see that clown Charles is meddling in politics, as a monarchist I've long been concerned about this plant talking nut job. His mother must be doing all she can to outlive him.
If you are a monarchist then you should accept the heir to the throne being kept in the picture. The genetic lottery and line to the throne is intrinsic to monarchy.
One thing we should copy from Europe is retirement of the monarch, or we are going to always have a gerontocracy.
The reason I'm a monarchist is because our head of state is apolitical, Charles should not interfere or be seen to be interfering.
The monarch is apolitical. The private audience with the PM will be a different matter.
As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.
In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.
For HMQ it was ever thus so most people don't have a problem with it.
For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.
William - great bloke, it seems, but not unlike millions of other young men and I can see no reason, as heir to the throne (and eventual King), helicopter pilot, occasional boozer, polo player, father, Boujis-frequenter, he should get such access.
Not sure about his counsel or advice, either.
The Queen had access to state papers during her fathers reign as did her mother. In broad terms such regular access began with Prince Albert although there was some initial resistance to such a move.
Whether as monarch Charles's advice and counsel would wise or not is largely irrelevant. As monarch he may give it. The government may also ignore it.
I expect there will be a petition for William to succeed HMQ. The people who dislike Charles dislike him very much indeed.
I hope Trump wins, I don't like him much but my life won't change whoever wins and the reaction of the bedwetters will be hilarious.
Maybe a Trump presidency would not affect you much but a President Trump with his finger on the nuclear button and in charge of the most powerful military on the planet could certainly have significant consequences
Meaning: if Trump wins he'll launch nuclear missiles immediately.
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
Well if Trump has a hissy fit and nukes Moscow and Beijing I would imagine winding up the handwringers will be the last thing on your mind
Yes I can picture it now, Ivana burns the toast one morning and in a fit of pique Trump nukes Moscow and Beijing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
It seems unlikely. For a start, surely the White House is packed to the rafters with chefs who can make toast.
Plus Ivana was dumped for a newer model several models ago.
Fair play to Donald, I'm beginning to like him even more
He said he'd be dating Ivanka, if she wasn't his daughter.
Comments
Tory co-chairman claimed Obama sent pollster to UK to stop Miliband, book says
Lord Feldman made claim about pollster Jim Messina in election night victory speech, say authors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh
http://bit.ly/1OvDfdh
Debates are overrated.
O/T: a wistful piece by a Corbyn fan on how difficult it is to discuss him sensibly - though I think it's a particular example of a general media phenomenon:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/15/balanced-debate-jeremy-corbyn-labour-media-attacks
The book argues: “If we assume the polls were as wrong throughout the parliament as they were on election day and adjust the voting intention polling data accordingly, then the polling crossover [ie Conservatives overtaking Labour] occurred sometime around July 2013, with the Conservative lead slowly but steadily increasing after that. Indeed Labour led and probably only narrowly for around 18 months between roughly March 2012 and July 2013.”
http://www.kraxon.com/zodiac-eclipse-revenge/
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/677036476161531904
That's why I want him to win, it'll give the hand wringers something else to fret about.
What happens when he drops out? Is the money returned to donors, kept by Bush for next time, or inherited by the party?
According to the new Kavanagh and Cowley book, Obama sent Jim Messina to the Conservatives with the aim of stopping Miliband's Labour.
Why doesn't President Obama just go and JOIN THE TORIES
The effect is that politicians become extremely defensive - the main priority in an interview is to get one line across and not screw up with some comment that can be taken out of context. The victim is the level of public debate, which is seriously awful.
Nothing to do with Labour or their leader.....
Plus of course please don't fall into the trap (even if you are using it as a shorthand) of criticising the public, which is what a criticism of "public debate" of course is doing.
Come on Donald, you can do it, you're a nutter but the couple of days you have as president before Armageddon will be worth it.
From what I have read here, it would seem that Trump is all blather and no substance.. pandering to peoples worst fears. He could be the Daily Mail in human form.
Perhaps the members of the Republican Party are anticipating more fun from the prospect of impeaching Hillary for various misdemeanours than from the prospect of a Trump presidency.
Since the Tories don't run elections like this - I wonder if they'll be another conference speech contest as per 2005 or a TV head to head or a whole new system with more than two final candidates
JeremyCorbyn4PM
This Monday will mark 100 days since JC was elected leader. What was your highlight? Use #jez100 we'll RT our fav https://t.co/k65j18CUnE
But I see that she's been scheduling sex. This is called "doing it wrong".
I scanned @Speedy's comments but didn't pick it up there - anyone else notice this?
You should have seen me last night, I was at it for six straight hours.
I find that quite incredible.
Immigrants: doing jobs normal Americans won't.
As heir to the throne I want Prince Charles to be fully informed so that on succession he will be fully appraised of the affairs of state so that he may be able to properly undertake his constitutional role to advise, counsel and warn the government of the day.
In time both Prince William and Prince George will have a similar role. Historically both the heir to the throne and the spouse of the Monarch have had similar access to state papers.
Reasons to vote OUT #327:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/i-didn-t-think-ttip-could-get-any-scarier-but-then-i-spoke-to-the-eu-official-in-charge-of-it-a6690591.html and then today..
Reasons to vote OUT #328:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12052102/EU-plan-to-deploy-armed-guards-on-borders-against-states-will.html Armed German border guards marching into Greece or Hungary against the will of their governments, what could possibly go wrong ?! The Czech border with Germany might be particularly sensitive!
Having a good leader and good narrative also helped.
Somewhat ridiculously, I had to Google it, and then type in "www.weebly.com/editor/logout.php".
Pisses me off when sites hide things. Blogspot did the same (still no idea how to log out directly, but as it's Google-linked I can just sign out elsewhere and refresh to check it worked).
Republic are just whining, as usual.
Nursie's real name, of course, being Bernard.
Janet T Beckett @carbonsaveruk 2m2 minutes ago
For twitching at the curtains of Overton window for the first time in 30 years #jez100
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446547/Why-Tory-MP-is-the-father-of-all-Bernards.html
The surprise in this story is that anyone is surprised. Any cursory glance at post Georgian constitutional history would indicate that the present situation is the norm.
Reins*.
It does look like death by a thousand cuts for sane Labour.
The danger, well, one of them, is that, like Miliband, mid-term blues mean Labour do alright in some elections, giving the sheep of Labour an excuse not to defenestrate Corbyn (or even attempt to do so).
The greatest danger, of course, is that Corbyn becomes PM.
Edited extra bit: Mr. W, was mildly surprised the BBC bothered reporting it.
Mr. Eagles, surely he was named after Nursie?
He'd be a hero in his own party and would then win the referendum.
Or am I just fantasising?
For subsequent generations, perhaps including Charles, I'm not so sure.
William - great bloke, it seems, but not unlike millions of other young men and I can see no reason, as heir to the throne (and eventual King), helicopter pilot, occasional boozer, polo player, father, Boujis-frequenter, he should get such access.
Not sure about his counsel or advice, either.
what are they expecting? Charles to take no interest, then find himself flung in at the deep end on his first day in the job, after decades of waiting?
Anyway if you knew what you were talking about LBJ is the only President who came close to using nuclear weapons. A story and President that Trump's consigliere Roger Stone has written extensively on.
Re that piece of OJ's, if you elect someone from beyond the pale they won't be treated as though they were within it. Becoming Leader of the Opposition does usually confer a kind of respectability and stature that makes news coverage more considered (not necessarily less hostile!) I think it's unsurprising that that isn't happening in Corbyn's case.
Meh, I'm struggling to express myself. What I'm trying to say is that Corbyn and his followers have an extreme case of having to fight for the right to be heard.
Whether as monarch Charles's advice and counsel would wise or not is largely irrelevant. As monarch he may give it. The government may also ignore it.
Almost certainly - unless 'Leave' starts registering 20% poll leads perhaps...
#Unemployment rate 5.2% for Aug-Oct 2015, down from 6.0% a year earlier http://ow.ly/VXHkE
@ONS · 20s21 seconds ago
#Employment rate 73.9% for Aug-Oct 2015, highest since records began in 1971 http://ow.ly/VXHyK
Clearly it is wiser to have a monarch who is across the issues of the day and able to offer an informed perspective to the Prime Minister of the day.
Republicans and dullard malcontents will seek any opportunity, however misguided, to chip away at our monarchy. They will fail.
For Aug-Oct 2015 there were 31.30 million people in work and 1.71 million unemployed https://t.co/hVKvwEsd0V https://t.co/t1kDdfOz28
In my mind is a picture, shown in all the media, of William being manhandled into a car after a night out because he is so drunk he can't stand up on his own.
Some years ago the decision was made to demystify, demythify the Royal Family. They can't have their cake and eat it. Either they are a distant presence opining on events within their kingdom, or they are one of us (as they are trying to be now) in which case what's with the private audience with the PM?
Improved life expectancy and better health can mean younger royals taste 'real life', and gradually become more distant ahead of becoming monarch.
As Mr. W indicates, some people will always find something to complain about.
The global labour market is starting to tighten. This movement will have a profound effect. The era of cheap labour may be coming to an end.
Evan Davis: Isn't that a bit creepy?
Coulter: Jeez, have you Brits lost your sense of humour?
Evan Davis: Do you think terms such as r*ghead and sand jockey are helpful to political debate?
Coulter: Jeez, have you Brits lost your sense of humour?
Ouch. #Jez100 https://t.co/3a8yCWIBDP