The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
The Democratic caucus system is really terrible. The land of the free, cradle of modern representative government, begins choosing the leader of the free world with a non-secret evening of stand-in-a-corner which can give the popular-vote loser the most delegates
Ha Ha Ha , how pathetic are journalists in Scotland, pathetic cretins.
Not as pathetic as those defacing currency
LOL, one coin , you could not make it up. Is it any wonder the papers are nearly all bankrupt. The amount of crap going about and they are frothing and making up crap about ONE coin. Too pathetic to believe.
Tip of the iceberg no doubt
Labour will have it on FM questions on Thursday no doubt.
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
... People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
What a load of tosh Nick.
It is Labour's voters that have been deserting the party since 01. And many of them to the Tories.
If the people don't like the Conservatives, they hate Labour.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Basically if the two options are:
A: Clinton 8, Sanders 2, O'Malley 0 B: Clinton 8, Sanders 1, O'Malley 1
From that article mentioned on previous thread is this top comment and worthy of the worlds most deluded person award. I mean seriously where do they find these muppets? I publish it in full because it really should be savoured and enjoyed ( I would like to think he's taking the piss but it's got to the point you can't be sure)
Leftyliesrefuted 8 hours ago The Nasty Party is not known as the Nasty Party for nothing! Thank goodness that we on the Progressive Left have now embraced the kinder, gentler politics of Our Jeremy - with the results that can be seen in Jeremy's unprecedented opinion poll ratings, which in any case are totally irrelevant as opinion polls are merely the tool of neoliberal corporations and the Right-wing Murdoch monopoly media, e.g. the far-Right BBC.
It really is high time that we on the Progressive Left called out Camoron, and all the other evil Tory scum in the Nasty Party, for their hate speech, their bigotry, their unbridled racism, their intolerance and their totally blinkered attitudes towards people who are different to them.
Camoron's totally predictable comments - on Holocaust Day, no less! - about "a bunch of migrants" was nothing less than Nazism in its sheer racism about a group of young men (who in any case are mostly women and children) who have courageously left their families behind in war-torn lands in order to face the horrors of Austerity Britain, with its constant attacks on the poor, vulnerable and unemployed, who are all forced to work on Zero Hour Contracts in compulsory Foodbanks whilst paying ever-increasing amounts of the illegal Bedroom Tax, so that the likes of the 1%, e.g. Google and the Banksters, who already own well over 100% of all the wealth and pay no tax whatsoever, can enjoy tax giveaways courtesy of Gidiot and his gang of unelected Bullingdon Bully Boys.
Fortunately for those of us - on the Left, obviously - who have retained our humanity, in just over 4 years and 3 months' time, this country will have the opportunity to vote for a truly caring Government, headed by Our Jeremy, which will, by totally abolishing racist immigration controls, along with a total reversal of 35 years' worth of Thatcherite economic policies based on greed not need, build a Britain that all true Socialists can be proud of: the Venezuela of Europe, no less!
racism about a group of young men (who in any case are mostly women and children) who have courageously left their families behind in war-torn lands in order to face the horrors of Austerity Britain,
Don't forget the "The Venezuela of Europe" Better stock up on Loo roll soft ply then.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
The story is true - they've shown the app on TV. It works at a precinct level, and the Dems have over 1600 of them.
The Democratic caucus process is truly byzantine. The caucus manual is over 50 pages long.
Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes 40 mins40 minutes ago Frontbencher @RichardBurgon, AKA the farting commie, is at the despatch box, repeating "bankers" over and over again. Man is a moron.
Presumably he has been having lots of meetings with bankers, in the City?
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
How much was lost on Black Wednesday compared to the 2008 crash. Was it more less or about the same.?
Black Wednesday cost £3.3bn. I'm guessing the 2008 crash dwarfs it in comparison.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Can anyone tell me in a sentence or two why O'Malley is doing so poorly. He is hardly being dwarfed by a pair of colossuses (colossi?).
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
Strange that people only get bored of Labour, not that they dislike them too apparently. Tories need to be careful of assuming they are more popular than they are, and I happen to think the Labour brand is still strong, but that kind of thinking seems dangerous for a party, little different than the one peddled by some that people voted Tory but didn't really mean to.
Incidentally, I am sure there are people wondering what sort of idiot takes Rubio at 16 in Iowa. The answer is me; a man who is hedging much larger amounts against him taking NH or the nomination, both of which are largely correlated with Iowa.
Rubio at 16 sounds like a very good bet at the moment - he's surged off the back of Cruz's eligibility question mark, and was within 5% in two of the last three polls. He may have the momentum at the right moment.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Basically if the two options are:
A: Clinton 8, Sanders 2, O'Malley 0 B: Clinton 8, Sanders 1, O'Malley 1
Option B results.
That's it. Apologies if I didn't explain it well.
The Democrats have a complex method of apportioning delegates based on vote counts.
Incidentally, I am sure there are people wondering what sort of idiot takes Rubio at 16 in Iowa. The answer is me; a man who is hedging much larger amounts against him taking NH or the nomination, both of which are largely correlated with Iowa.
Rubio at 16 sounds like a very good bet at the moment - he's surged off the back of Cruz's eligibility question mark, and was within 5% in two of the last three polls. He may have the momentum at the right moment.
Before exams, I always used to ask myself: what question am I hoping won't come up on the paper? Then I would revise that.
The only thing that could throw my book off would be if Rubio won Iowa. So I've laid Rubio a little at 3 and bought him in Iowa at 16s.
Mr. B, the Democrats wish they had someone as ruthlessly talented as Basil II, diplomatically astute as Alexius Comnenus or generally superb as John Comnenus.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
How much was lost on Black Wednesday compared to the 2008 crash. Was it more less or about the same.?
Black Wednesday cost £3.3bn. I'm guessing the 2008 crash dwarfs it in comparison.
28m28 minutes ago The New York Times @nytimes Breaking News: The Zika virus is a global emergency, the W.H.O. said, citing possible links to infant brain damage http://nyti.ms/1WXNE7L
The New York Times retweeted Denise Grady 4h4 hours ago Denise Grady @nytDeniseGrady Babies with small heads, linked to Zika virus: overwhelmed doctors in Brazil have never seen anything
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
The app works at the precinct level, of which there are over 1600. The idea is to boost O'Malley where possible to hurt Sanders without hurting Clinton. Once you enter the 3 vote totals it will tell whether to boost O'Malley and how many votes. Once the vote totals from the 1600+ precincts are reported, via a complex and labyrinthine process the vote totals are converted to delegates.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Can anyone tell me in a sentence or two why O'Malley is doing so poorly. He is hardly being dwarfed by a pair of colossuses (colossi?).
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
The app works at the precinct level, of which there are over 1600. The idea is to boost O'Malley where possible to hurt Sanders without hurting Clinton. Once you enter the 3 vote totals it will tell whether to boost O'Malley and how many votes. Once the vote totals from the 1600+ precincts are reported, via a complex and labyrinthine process the vote totals are converted to delegates.
It does seem rather arrogant / a waste of resources that could have been actually winning people over.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
The app works at the precinct level, of which there are over 1600. The idea is to boost O'Malley where possible to hurt Sanders without hurting Clinton. Once you enter the 3 vote totals it will tell whether to boost O'Malley and how many votes. Once the vote totals from the 1600+ precincts are reported, via a complex and labyrinthine process the vote totals are converted to delegates.
But O'Malley needs 15%, he polls at 5% or less. We are talking about a lot of votes in a neck and neck race where even one vote could determine the winner.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
The app works at the precinct level, of which there are over 1600. The idea is to boost O'Malley where possible to hurt Sanders without hurting Clinton. Once you enter the 3 vote totals it will tell whether to boost O'Malley and how many votes. Once the vote totals from the 1600+ precincts are reported, via a complex and labyrinthine process the vote totals are converted to delegates.
It does seem rather arrogant / a waste of resources that could have been actually winning people over.
It's Hillary - she's not known for playing nice. Winning people over is not one of her strengths. Every time she makes a TV appearance her numbers drop. Sanders events draw 8-10 x hers.
Incidentally, I am sure there are people wondering what sort of idiot takes Rubio at 16 in Iowa. The answer is me; a man who is hedging much larger amounts against him taking NH or the nomination, both of which are largely correlated with Iowa.
Rubio at 16 sounds like a very good bet at the moment - he's surged off the back of Cruz's eligibility question mark, and was within 5% in two of the last three polls. He may have the momentum at the right moment.
Before exams, I always used to ask myself: what question am I hoping won't come up on the paper? Then I would revise that.
The only thing that could throw my book off would be if Rubio won Iowa. So I've laid Rubio a little at 3 and bought him in Iowa at 16s.
Rubio doing well in Iowa wouldn't be great for me.
So long as Jeb doesn't trouble the top 3 I'll be fine tho !
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
The Democratic caucus system is really terrible. The land of the free, cradle of modern representative government, begins choosing the leader of the free world with a non-secret evening of stand-in-a-corner which can give the popular-vote loser the most delegates
That is how Obama won in 2008. It is a completely absurd system.
Interesting article on Trump. Very encouraging if he is reaching out to former Defense Intelligence Agency head Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn was forced out by Obama, which says everything, very impressive guy.
Looks like Trump would be the first sane US President on foreign policy since George HW Bush, would be a huge relief to the rest of the world.
McDonnell's pension (not the MP one which will be very substantial no doubt ) but 'just' the £14,421pa is worth £288,420. That's for the lifetime allowance test anyway.
I presume he got the tax free cash entitlement at the same time as whenever he started getting that pension and which may have been 3x that pension - unless he commuted and took less income, more tax free cash..
and yet no taxable savings income?
For personal pension savers, we'd need to amass nearly £500,000 to get an income with the likely features he's receiving...
Just saying.
Quite right. There's an egregious disparity between public sector pension entitlement going forwards and the private sector.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
The app works at the precinct level, of which there are over 1600. The idea is to boost O'Malley where possible to hurt Sanders without hurting Clinton. Once you enter the 3 vote totals it will tell whether to boost O'Malley and how many votes. Once the vote totals from the 1600+ precincts are reported, via a complex and labyrinthine process the vote totals are converted to delegates.
By the time that's happened, the peachtree blossom will have come and gone. The media will call who won on the basis of most votes. It sounds like an idea that's too clever by half.
On a different but related O'Malley note, one reason it might make sense is if O'Malley polls better than expected. With his voters breaking 2:1 for Sanders, it would in that situation make sense to loan him a few Hillary delegates rather than release his to Sanders.
All the same, rather than playing games, she ought to go for as big a number as possible.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Agreed. Who wins most delegates in Iowa is utterly irrelevant. We're talking single-figure differences at most; we might only be talking single delegates. By contrast, the momentum that Sanders would gain if he wins would be huge. He would then be taken seriously by the media to an extent that he's not yet. Follow that up with a big win in NH - very likely now - and suddenly Hillary is on the ropes. Sure, she has a lot of money and a lot of southern states with more favourable demographics but she can't rely on that.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
The app works at the precinct level, of which there are over 1600. The idea is to boost O'Malley where possible to hurt Sanders without hurting Clinton. Once you enter the 3 vote totals it will tell whether to boost O'Malley and how many votes. Once the vote totals from the 1600+ precincts are reported, via a complex and labyrinthine process the vote totals are converted to delegates.
But O'Malley needs 15%, he polls at 5% or less. We are talking about a lot of votes in a neck and neck race where even one vote could determine the winner.
The Clinton campaign has come up with a smart phone app for tonight's caucus.
Remember the 15% viability threshold? If you key in the numbers for Clinton, Sanders and O'Malley, the app will tell you if and how many Clinton supporters should move to O'Malley. If he gets 15% he gets a delegate, which is one less for Sanders.
Will that be a danger for Hillary to lose to Sanders? In a race where Hillary leads by an average of 3, a mass move of 10% or more to O'Malley will be suicidal.
I don't believe the story, no one is that nuts.
Presumably it only tells you if the outcome would be one less to Sanders, not one less to Clinton.
But it is nuts, if Hillary loses Iowa its a big hit to her regardless if Sanders gets fewer delegates due to O'Malley.
Can anyone tell me in a sentence or two why O'Malley is doing so poorly. He is hardly being dwarfed by a pair of colossuses (colossi?).
He's the governor of Maryland.
I like their chocolate chip cookies. He'd get my vote.
Chuka Ummuna on C4 news debating Europe. He is no genius but he was so far ahead of the normal Labour drone as defies belief. He agrees with Cameron on racism in University selection; he agreed with part of Maggie's Bruges speech but he fought his corner for membership of the EU.
Whether you agree with him or not is really the point. This man is articulate, intelligent and Labour. It makes him almost unique. If he is not their next leader Labour are persisting in not being serious.
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
Strange that people only get bored of Labour, not that they dislike them too apparently. Tories need to be careful of assuming they are more popular than they are, and I happen to think the Labour brand is still strong, but that kind of thinking seems dangerous for a party, little different than the one peddled by some that people voted Tory but didn't really mean to.
Too right. I didn't want to vote Conservative but in the end I did intend to do so.
Incidentally, I am sure there are people wondering what sort of idiot takes Rubio at 16 in Iowa. The answer is me; a man who is hedging much larger amounts against him taking NH or the nomination, both of which are largely correlated with Iowa.
Rubio at 16 sounds like a very good bet at the moment - he's surged off the back of Cruz's eligibility question mark, and was within 5% in two of the last three polls. He may have the momentum at the right moment.
Before exams, I always used to ask myself: what question am I hoping won't come up on the paper? Then I would revise that.
The only thing that could throw my book off would be if Rubio won Iowa. So I've laid Rubio a little at 3 and bought him in Iowa at 16s.
Rubio doing well in Iowa wouldn't be great for me.
So long as Jeb doesn't trouble the top 3 I'll be fine tho !
Well before today Rubio would have been -25 (Iowa) -300 (NH) -191 (Nomination).
It's now +299 (Iowa) -300 (NH) -223 (Nomination).
I'm not covered of course if Iowa is a near miss for Rubio, which still gives him the momentum in NH... but if he misses Iowa, Cruz or Trump wins; a Trump victory seals NH and a Cruz victory would give him more momentum than Rubio.
Interesting article on Trump. Very encouraging if he is reaching out to former Defense Intelligence Agency head Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn was forced out by Obama, which says everything, very impressive guy.
Looks like Trump would be the first sane US President on foreign policy since George HW Bush, would be a huge relief to the rest of the world.
Chuka Ummuna on C4 news debating Europe. He is no genius but he was so far ahead of the normal Labour drone as defies belief. He agrees with Cameron on racism in University selection; he agreed with part of Maggie's Bruges speech but he fought his corner for membership of the EU.
Whether you agree with him or not is really the point. This man is articulate, intelligent and Labour. It makes him almost unique. If he is not their next leader Labour are persisting in not being serious.
But, there's some guy who was army, Labour think WWC love army so that solves all their problems
Has anyone had any experience with Winner Sports? Especially if it involved large bets/large wins.
I have some long term bets on Sadiq Khan with them.
Why do you ask ?
Thanks.
The odds are being slashed on a market where my position is about 4/5s short of where I would like it to be. Winner are offering the best odds but wary of giving them a huge sum of money as cannot find a great deal online about them.
Interesting article on Trump. Very encouraging if he is reaching out to former Defense Intelligence Agency head Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn was forced out by Obama, which says everything, very impressive guy.
Looks like Trump would be the first sane US President on foreign policy since George HW Bush, would be a huge relief to the rest of the world.
Wasn't GHWB the guy who let Saddam off the hook?
He was the one who did Iraq right. No need to go further, as his son proved.
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
Very ungrateful of the electorate to be bored of Labour in 2010 after all that they had achieved economically.
Has anyone had any experience with Winner Sports? Especially if it involved large bets/large wins.
I have some long term bets on Sadiq Khan with them.
Why do you ask ?
Thanks.
The odds are being slashed on a market where my position is about 4/5s short of where I would like it to be. Winner are offering the best odds but wary of giving them a huge sum of money as cannot find a great deal online about them.
Hmm
Take care they palped a bet I took on them for Labour to win Cannock Chase at 66-1. They're also based in Nicosia so I wouldn't do the mortgage with them. Perhaps risk £50 max ? Your call.
Interesting article on Trump. Very encouraging if he is reaching out to former Defense Intelligence Agency head Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn was forced out by Obama, which says everything, very impressive guy.
Looks like Trump would be the first sane US President on foreign policy since George HW Bush, would be a huge relief to the rest of the world.
Wasn't GHWB the guy who let Saddam off the hook?
He was the one who did Iraq right. No need to go further, as his son proved.
He encouraged to marsh Arabs to rebel then did nothing to support them. Shabby.
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
Very ungrateful of the electorate to be bored of Labour in 2010 after all that they had achieved economically.
Has anyone had any experience with Winner Sports? Especially if it involved large bets/large wins.
I have some long term bets on Sadiq Khan with them.
Why do you ask ?
Thanks.
The odds are being slashed on a market where my position is about 4/5s short of where I would like it to be. Winner are offering the best odds but wary of giving them a huge sum of money as cannot find a great deal online about them.
Hmm
Take care they palped a bet I took on them for Labour to win Cannock Chase at 66-1. They're also based in Nicosia so I wouldn't do the mortgage with them. Perhaps risk £50 max ? Your call.
I think a small bet should be okay. I will stick to the main bookies to be on the safe side even though their odds arn't as great.
28m28 minutes ago The New York Times @nytimes Breaking News: The Zika virus is a global emergency, the W.H.O. said, citing possible links to infant brain damage http://nyti.ms/1WXNE7L
The New York Times retweeted Denise Grady 4h4 hours ago Denise Grady @nytDeniseGrady Babies with small heads, linked to Zika virus: overwhelmed doctors in Brazil have never seen anything
Worth remembering the EU has quite a long border with Brazil
28m28 minutes ago The New York Times @nytimes Breaking News: The Zika virus is a global emergency, the W.H.O. said, citing possible links to infant brain damage http://nyti.ms/1WXNE7L
The New York Times retweeted Denise Grady 4h4 hours ago Denise Grady @nytDeniseGrady Babies with small heads, linked to Zika virus: overwhelmed doctors in Brazil have never seen anything
The World Hysteria Organisation has not had a good crisis for a few months so is badly in need of another one and preferably needs to label it worldwide. The illness affecting these babies in Brazil is extremely sad and the mosquiroes that cause it would be best eradicated. However as they say in NZ ''Zika virus infection is a mild febrile viral illness transmitted by mosquitoes. The mosquitoes that are able to transmit Zika virus are not normally found in New Zealand, therefore Zika should only be considered in people who have recently travelled overseas.'' http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/zika-virus
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
Very ungrateful of the electorate to be bored of Labour in 2010 after all that they had achieved economically.
Gordon Brown got 11 years before his luck ran out. George Osborne will be lucky if he gets as long. That will be no use to Labour if they are still less trusted.
Just what inheritance did Brown get? Compare that to a £160 billion deficit and a bunch of bankrupt banks and a shattered economy. A whole bunch of embittered usual suspects are just hyperventilating with hysteria around here. The amount of rational thought is close to zero. A pretty sad bunch.
Brown got an awful inheritance in terms of public services - schools literally rotting away (one of them in my patch closed several times a year because they couldn't replace the boiler; another was in "temporary" accommodation built in 1916, a third had gaping roof holes that they couldn't do more than patch), NHS waiting times of two years commonplace. The economy was indeed starting to reocver of the nightmare of Black Wednesday a few years before, but a fair description overall would be "improving but still grim".
That, flightpath, is why the Tories lost by the biggest landslide in recent times, and why they failed to get more than a fractional majority in either 2010 or 2015. People got bored with Labour, but they don't actually like the Conservatives.
How much was lost on Black Wednesday compared to the 2008 crash. Was it more less or about the same.?
It was a labour policy to join the ERM and was promised by Kinnock in the 92 election I think. it was the ERM which imposed stiff disciplines and did indeed squeeze out inflation but it was fierce and painful medicine - all the result of a policy demanded by Labour. The tories increased spending on the NHS by a significant amount (3-fold ?) There are problems when it comes to living within your means. Brown went far too far down the PFI solution. NP will not recognise any of that because he is blinkered.
28m28 minutes ago The New York Times @nytimes Breaking News: The Zika virus is a global emergency, the W.H.O. said, citing possible links to infant brain damage http://nyti.ms/1WXNE7L
The New York Times retweeted Denise Grady 4h4 hours ago Denise Grady @nytDeniseGrady Babies with small heads, linked to Zika virus: overwhelmed doctors in Brazil have never seen anything
Worth remembering the EU has quite a long border with Brazil
Borders are unimportant re infectious diseases. You need to look at two things - the natural epidemiological units and transport links which the vector can survive (e.g. direct air routes).
28m28 minutes ago The New York Times @nytimes Breaking News: The Zika virus is a global emergency, the W.H.O. said, citing possible links to infant brain damage http://nyti.ms/1WXNE7L
The New York Times retweeted Denise Grady 4h4 hours ago Denise Grady @nytDeniseGrady Babies with small heads, linked to Zika virus: overwhelmed doctors in Brazil have never seen anything
Worth remembering the EU has quite a long border with Brazil
There is no problem in the world that cannot be sorted by Brexit. Just ask Nigel!
Comments
The land of the free, cradle of modern representative government, begins choosing the leader of the free world with a non-secret evening of stand-in-a-corner which can give the popular-vote loser the most delegates
It is Labour's voters that have been deserting the party since 01. And many of them to the Tories.
If the people don't like the Conservatives, they hate Labour.
A: Clinton 8, Sanders 2, O'Malley 0
B: Clinton 8, Sanders 1, O'Malley 1
Option B results.
The Democratic caucus process is truly byzantine. The caucus manual is over 50 pages long.
The Democrats have a complex method of apportioning delegates based on vote counts.
The only thing that could throw my book off would be if Rubio won Iowa. So I've laid Rubio a little at 3 and bought him in Iowa at 16s.
If Hillary loans supporters to O'Malley and then loses the caucus it'll be the worst tactical voting blunder since, well, Labour last year.
28m28 minutes ago
The New York Times @nytimes
Breaking News: The Zika virus is a global emergency, the W.H.O. said, citing possible links to infant brain damage
http://nyti.ms/1WXNE7L
The New York Times retweeted
Denise Grady
4h4 hours ago
Denise Grady @nytDeniseGrady
Babies with small heads, linked to Zika virus: overwhelmed doctors in Brazil have never seen anything
http://www.unilad.co.uk/news/the-unhappiest-towns-in-england-have-been-revealed/
The happiest places in the UK are:
1. Brent
2. Newham
3. Redbridge
4. Merton
5. City and Hackney
6. Haringey
7. Southwark
8. Lambeth
9. Hillingdon
We are talking about a lot of votes in a neck and neck race where even one vote could determine the winner.
It's nuts.
So long as Jeb doesn't trouble the top 3 I'll be fine tho !
Interesting article on Trump. Very encouraging if he is reaching out to former Defense Intelligence Agency head Gen. Michael Flynn. Flynn was forced out by Obama, which says everything, very impressive guy.
Looks like Trump would be the first sane US President on foreign policy since George HW Bush, would be a huge relief to the rest of the world.
On a different but related O'Malley note, one reason it might make sense is if O'Malley polls better than expected. With his voters breaking 2:1 for Sanders, it would in that situation make sense to loan him a few Hillary delegates rather than release his to Sanders.
All the same, rather than playing games, she ought to go for as big a number as possible.
http://time.com/4201806/hillary-clinton-martin-omalley-bernie-sanders-iowa/
Whether you agree with him or not is really the point. This man is articulate, intelligent and Labour. It makes him almost unique. If he is not their next leader Labour are persisting in not being serious.
It's now +299 (Iowa) -300 (NH) -223 (Nomination).
I'm not covered of course if Iowa is a near miss for Rubio, which still gives him the momentum in NH... but if he misses Iowa, Cruz or Trump wins; a Trump victory seals NH and a Cruz victory would give him more momentum than Rubio.
Anyway at 17s this has been very cheap.
Why do you ask ?
http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/property/residential-property/unhappy-hour-these-are-the-uks-most-miserable-places-to-live-in/10815.article
Most unhappy:
Barking and Dagenham
Hounslow
Brent
Harrow
Newham
Tower Hamlets
Greenwich
Luton
Hillingdon
Haringey
The odds are being slashed on a market where my position is about 4/5s short of where I would like it to be. Winner are offering the best odds but wary of giving them a huge sum of money as cannot find a great deal online about them.
Lets take a look at some of their achievements
Government Debt
1997q2 £364.5bn
2010q2 £999.9bn
Unemployment
1997q2 2.05m
2010q2 2.49m
Inflation
1997q2 1.6%
2010q2 3.5%
Industrial Production
1997q2 110.9
2010q2 103.2
Trade Balance
1997q2 £0.595bn surplus
2010q2 £9.025bn deficit
Take care they palped a bet I took on them for Labour to win Cannock Chase at 66-1. They're also based in Nicosia so I wouldn't do the mortgage with them. Perhaps risk £50 max ? Your call.
The illness affecting these babies in Brazil is extremely sad and the mosquiroes that cause it would be best eradicated.
However as they say in NZ
''Zika virus infection is a mild febrile viral illness transmitted by mosquitoes. The mosquitoes that are able to transmit Zika virus are not normally found in New Zealand, therefore Zika should only be considered in people who have recently travelled overseas.''
http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/zika-virus
The tories increased spending on the NHS by a significant amount (3-fold ?)
There are problems when it comes to living within your means. Brown went far too far down the PFI solution.
NP will not recognise any of that because he is blinkered.