I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
Still too close to call with online polls. It'll be interesting to see what the next phone poll shows.
They're showing a clear Remain lead once you add the DKs to Remain.
Ignore the DKs at your peril.
Phone polls show a majority of Tory voters choosing Remain, online polls show them choosing Leave, the same divide applies to pensioners.
So here' s an experiment that I recommend, since PB is 80% Tory and over the age of 50, lets do a poll of PB users. If a majority comes in favour of Remain the phone polls are right, if it's Leave the online polls are right.
The Times is reporting Gove is torn between Cameron and Brexit
Makes me wonder whether Uncle Rupert (along with his fragrant new fiancée Jerry Hall) is gunning for Leave. Gove has always been in the Murdoch stable.
I am still in shock at the Batwomen documentary.....again I repeat, how the hell did she convince Brown, Cameron and loads of luuvies to give them £100's million.
Still too close to call with online polls. It'll be interesting to see what the next phone poll shows.
They're showing a clear Remain lead once you add the DKs to Remain.
Ignore the DKs at your peril.
Phone polls show a majority of Tory voters choosing Remain, online polls show them choosing Leave, the same divide applies to pensioners.
So here' s an experiment that I recommend, since PB is 80% Tory and over the age of 50, lets do a poll of PB users. If a majority comes in favour of Remain the phone polls are right, if it's Leave the online polls are right.
I am still in shock at the Batwomen documentary.....again I repeat, how the hell did she convince Brown, Cameron and loads of luuvies to give them £100's million.
I am still in shock at the Batwomen documentary.....again I repeat, how the hell did she convince Brown, Cameron and loads of luuvies to give them £100's million.
You are I trust not unaware that they splurged literally billions on Fred the Shred? Of whom little more needs to be or indeed can be said. Compared to that...it's bad, but it's not that bad
I am still in shock at the Batwomen documentary.....again I repeat, how the hell did she convince Brown, Cameron and loads of luuvies to give them £100's million.
She told them the media would tear them apart for closing down that wonderful kids company. Apparently she never expected the media to ever look into if they were so bloody wonderful in the first place.
Still, better late than never. What's she up to these days, did it mention? With financial skills like hers she could get a job in defence procurement or designing government IT systems.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
I am still in shock at the Batwomen documentary.....again I repeat, how the hell did she convince Brown, Cameron and loads of luuvies to give them £100's million.
Because fantasists and would be world-saviours are impressed by fantasists and would-be world-saviours.
Quite a few papers are reporting Boris is backing Remain.
Ah, has he done another 180° this evening?
That's the thing about Boris. It's not, as I once thought, that he has objectionable views. He doesn't actually seem to have any views at all, leaving him free to embrace whatever people seem to want. That's why - I admit - he's not been a bad Mayor, since he's adopted a London outlook suitable to the job: pro-immigration, pro-City, socially liberal.
Then why do people kick up such a fuss about us doing it? If there's no negative reaction from anyone in Europe about it, and we're not about to turn into a nation of human rights abusing barbarians if we do it (spying and torturing notwithstanding - though I would guess we outsource the latter), why wouldn't all parties have agreed on doing it years ago?
snip
Under the existing 1998 HRA, British courts have little choice but to kowtow to ECHR decisions - it basically makes our courts a surrogate that follows its exact moves:
"(The HRA) aim was to incorporate into UK law the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Act makes a remedy for breach of a Convention right available in UK courts, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg.
In particular, the Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the Convention, unless the wording of any other primary legislation provides no other choice. It also requires the judiciary (including tribunals) to take account of any decisions, judgment or opinion of the European Court of Human Rights, and to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way which is compatible with Convention rights. However, if it is not possible to interpret an Act of Parliament so as to make it compatible with the Convention, the judges are not allowed to override it. All they can do is issue a declaration of incompatibility. .. However, judges may strike down secondary legislation. "
From Conservative Manifesto:
"We will scrap Labour's Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights which will restore common sense to the application of human rights in the UK. The Bill will remain faithful to the basic principles of human rights, which we signed up to in the original European Convention on Human Rights. It will protect basic rights, like the right to a fair trial, and the right to life, which are an essential part of a modern democratic society. But it will reverse the mission creep that has meant human rights law being used for more and more purposes, and often with little regard for the rights of wider society"
If (and it's a big if) it is as billed it will tack our towards a written constitution, which would have primacy over decisions of the ECHR, and oblige our judges to consider that in a way they are currently not because we don't have one and the law basically says "Obey Strasbourg", unless parliament directly says otherwise in primary legislation.
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
Genuine question - do you think there is a clear front runner for the Presidency at this moment, from either party? Somebody whom, if they were nominated, would hammer the opposition harder than Robert the Bruce did at Bannockburn?
Bluntly my impression is that they are all crap and this could be the most inept election since Tilden vs Hayes in 1876.
Then why do people kick up such a fuss about us doing it? If there's no negative reaction from anyone in Europe about it, and we're not about to turn into a nation of human rights abusing barbarians if we do it (spying and torturing notwithstanding - though I would guess we outsource the latter), why wouldn't all parties have agreed on doing it years ago?
snip
Under the existing 1998 HRA, British courts have little choice but to kowtow to ECHR decisions - it basically makes our courts a surrogate that follows its exact moves:
"(The HRA) aim was to incorporate into UK law the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Act makes a remedy for breach of a Convention right available in UK courts, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg.
In particular, the Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the Convention, unless the wording of any other primary legislation provides no other choice. It also requires the judiciary (including tribunals) to take account of any decisions, judgment or opinion of the European Court of Human Rights, and to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way which is compatible with Convention rights. However, if it is not possible to interpret an Act of Parliament so as to make it compatible with the Convention, the judges are not allowed to override it. All they can do is issue a declaration of incompatibility. .. However, judges may strike down secondary legislation. "
From Conservative Manifesto:
"We will scrap Labour's Human Rights Act and introduce a British Bill of Rights which will restore common sense to the application of human rights in the UK. The Bill will remain faithful to the basic principles of human rights, which we signed up to in the original European Convention on Human Rights. It will protect basic rights, like the right to a fair trial, and the right to life, which are an essential part of a modern democratic society. But it will reverse the mission creep that has meant human rights law being used for more and more purposes, and often with little regard for the rights of wider society"
If (and it's a big if) it is as billed it will tack our towards a written constitution, which would have primacy over decisions of the ECHR, and oblige our judges to consider that in a way they are currently not because we don't have one and the law basically says "Obey Strasbourg", unless parliament directly says otherwise in primary legislation.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
I certainly cannot see much to get excited about with Rubio. Cruz is looking good. If Trump gets scalped in New Hampshire then he is doomed.
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I see the Mail is at pains to say that its recalling of the eve of World War Two is in no way a comparison of the EU to Nazi Germany. Perish the thought.
I see the Mail is at pains to say that its recalling of the eve of a World War Two is in no way a comparison of the EU to Nazi Germany. Perish the thought.
Does The Mail really want to bring up its World War II history?
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
I see the Mail is at pains to say that its recalling of the eve of World War Two is in no way a comparison of the EU to Nazi Germany. Perish the thought.
Hurrah for the Blueshirts?
(That is not a reference to Eoin O'Duffy. PS, iPhones can suck when it comes to emoticons.)
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
Genuine question - do you think there is a clear front runner for the Presidency at this moment, from either party? Somebody whom, if they were nominated, would hammer the opposition harder than Robert the Bruce did at Bannockburn?
Bluntly my impression is that they are all crap and this could be the most inept election since Tilden vs Hayes in 1876.
No it's still very unpredictable but you can't fault it for entertainment value. Perhaps for the same misguided reason I hope they don't miss the chance to give us President Trump.
That looks very similar to the NH numbers on the GOP side, so Marcomentum has seen him leap from a strong third place in Iowa all the way to... third place!!
There is still the Saturday debate to come. Right now I have the suspicion that N.H. will be a pretty close 3 way race despite what polls say at the moment, S.Carolina will be the key state for the top 3.
Nothing is inscribed in stone, not with a debate 4 days before voting and a severe snowstorm on voting day.
So you think the fix is in? Problem is Trump is too far ahead in NH, but I suppose a suspiciously strong second place for Rubio and surprise sub 30s from Trump would do it.
Seriously I fail to see a single state Rubio can win, that is his problem, well behind Trump even in Florida. Trump will take the South, not Cruz, and Greater New England including the Rustbelt Trump will crush it with all the delegates that that region holds.
Rubio just isn't popular as his polling shows, just so vulnerable on immigration, intelligence and foreign policy.
But he has the media, an unpopular person can still win the nomination with overwhelming media support (see Romney). In a 3 way race everything is possible, just look at the pileup on Cruz after his Iowa victory.
The first primaries are all that matter and in those it's a game of musical chairs of who surges last, Rubio won that one in Iowa, let's see who will surge last in N.H and S.Carolina.
Of course it's entirely possible that Rubio, having such a poor start, will surge last only to end up 3rd again.
Depends what happens to the Bush, Kasich and Christie supporters. If they decide that their candidates are already frit, and their support collapses to the 2s and 3s, Rubio could surge late and very big - mid to high thirties. If they don't desert their guys figuring that Iowa doesn't count for moderates in the GOP and therefore NH should hold the national beauty contest as to which of the four should bear the banner, then he could be as low as fourth or even fifth.
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
I'm increasingly sympathetic towards Jeremy Hunt since he became a hate figure.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
So you're hoping for a Bloomberg win then?!
(Damn good book, btw)
I still don't quite know how to price Bloomberg. He was definitely value @ 800-1000 when I backed him, but right now I haven't really got a clue as to what his odds should be.
There seem to be willing backers at ~60-90/1 so I could lay off my profit in return for ~£650.
It's financially worthwhile for me to spend a bit of time figuring out whether or not to lay it off, perhaps I'll devote tomorrow evening to that pleasant task.
In the 1930s the Daily Mail was quite pro appeasement, and hailed the Munich agreement as a triumph. It has a history of getting it wrong on Europe:
Rothermere and his newspapers supported Neville Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement. When Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia in March 1938 he sent a telegram to Adolf Hitler saying: "My dear Fuhrer everyone in England is profoundly moved by the bloodless solution to the Czechoslovakian problem. People not so much concerned with territorial readjustment as with dread of another war with its accompanying bloodbath. Frederick the Great was a great popular figure. I salute your excellency's star which rises higher and higher."
That looks very similar to the NH numbers on the GOP side, so Marcomentum has seen him leap from a strong third place in Iowa all the way to... third place!!
There is still the Saturday debate to come. Right now I have the suspicion that N.H. will be a pretty close 3 way race despite what polls say at the moment, S.Carolina will be the key state for the top 3.
Nothing is inscribed in stone, not with a debate 4 days before voting and a severe snowstorm on voting day.
So you think the fix is in? Problem is Trump is too far ahead in NH, but I suppose a suspiciously strong second place for Rubio and surprise sub 30s from Trump would do it.
Seriously I fail to see a single state Rubio can win, that is his problem, well behind Trump even in Florida. Trump will take the South, not Cruz, and Greater New England including the Rustbelt Trump will crush it with all the delegates that that region holds.
Rubio just isn't popular as his polling shows, just so vulnerable on immigration, intelligence and foreign policy.
But he has the media, an unpopular person can still win the nomination with overwhelming media support (see Romney). In a 3 way race everything is possible, just look at the pileup on Cruz after his Iowa victory.
The first primaries are all that matter and in those it's a game of musical chairs of who surges last, Rubio won that one in Iowa, let's see who will surge last in N.H and S.Carolina.
Of course it's entirely possible that Rubio, having such a poor start, will surge last only to end up 3rd again.
Depends what happens to the Bush, Kasich and Christie supporters. If they decide that their candidates are already frit, and their support collapses to the 2s and 3s, Rubio could surge late and very big - mid to high thirties. If they don't desert their guys figuring that Iowa doesn't count for moderates in the GOP and therefore NH should hold the national beauty contest as to which of the four should bear the banner, then he could be as low as fourth or even fifth.
Isn't Rubio a fair bit more conservative than all those, and also Trump who some of the moderates may head to ?
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
I certainly cannot see much to get excited about with Rubio. Cruz is looking good. If Trump gets scalped in New Hampshire then he is doomed.
I've noticed a tendency on PB to rubbish Rubio. I'll admit, the debate format has not allowed him to shine. But for those who know him beyond just the debates, of all the people in both parties running, he is the most natural politician.
In an election cycle with a rebellious electorate, that may be a burden rather than an asset. If he gets the nomination, he will be a handful for Hillary. Or Bernie.
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
I'm increasingly sympathetic towards Jeremy Hunt since he became a hate figure.
Hunt knows a lot. He recommends Dr google for children with rashes...
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
He seems to lack some presentation skills — when he wanted to big up the King James bible which almost everyone (at least most of the C of E and protestant sects) even R.Dawkins agrees we should read as a valuable part of British culture and history.. he managed to antagonise everyone
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
So you're hoping for a Bloomberg win then?!
(Damn good book, btw)
I still don't quite know how to price Bloomberg. He was definitely value @ 800-1000 when I backed him, but right now I haven't really got a clue as to what his odds should be.
There seem to be willing backers at ~60-90/1 so I could lay off my profit in return for ~£650.
It's financially worthwhile for me to spend a bit of time figuring out whether or not to lay it off, perhaps I'll devote tomorrow evening to that pleasant task.
I'll post my conclusion and reasoning on here.
I would reckon that Bloomberg's ceiling as a third party candidate would be 20% of the vote, so anything over a 1% chance of winning is too much.
That looks very similar to the NH numbers on the GOP side, so Marcomentum has seen him leap from a strong third place in Iowa all the way to... third place!!
There is still the Saturday debate to come. Right now I have the suspicion that N.H. will be a pretty close 3 way race despite what polls say at the moment, S.Carolina will be the key state for the top 3.
Nothing is inscribed in stone, not with a debate 4 days before voting and a severe snowstorm on voting day.
So you think the fix is in? Problem is Trump is too far ahead in NH, but I suppose a suspiciously strong second place for Rubio and surprise sub 30s from Trump would do it.
Seriously I fail to see a single state Rubio can win, that is his problem, well behind Trump even in Florida. Trump will take the South, not Cruz, and Greater New England including the Rustbelt Trump will crush it with all the delegates that that region holds.
Rubio just isn't popular as his polling shows, just so vulnerable on immigration, intelligence and foreign policy.
But he has the media, an unpopular person can still win the nomination with overwhelming media support (see Romney). In a 3 way race everything is possible, just look at the pileup on Cruz after his Iowa victory.
The first primaries are all that matter and in those it's a game of musical chairs of who surges last, Rubio won that one in Iowa, let's see who will surge last in N.H and S.Carolina.
Of course it's entirely possible that Rubio, having such a poor start, will surge last only to end up 3rd again.
Depends what happens to the Bush, Kasich and Christie supporters. If they decide that their candidates are already frit, and their support collapses to the 2s and 3s, Rubio could surge la
Isn't Rubio a fair bit more conservative than all those, and also Trump who some of the moderates may head to ?
In the 1930s the Daily Mail was quite pro appeasement, and hailed the Munich agreement as a triumph. It has a history of getting it wrong on Europe:
Rothermere and his newspapers supported Neville Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement. When Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia in March 1938 he sent a telegram to Adolf Hitler saying: "My dear Fuhrer everyone in England is profoundly moved by the bloodless solution to the Czechoslovakian problem. People not so much concerned with territorial readjustment as with dread of another war with its accompanying bloodbath. Frederick the Great was a great popular figure. I salute your excellency's star which rises higher and higher."
And the Mirror carried not dissimilar articles back then.
As did the Magazine of the Peace Pledge Union - the White Poppy people.
In the 1930s the Daily Mail was quite pro appeasement, and hailed the Munich agreement as a triumph. It has a history of getting it wrong on Europe:
Rothermere and his newspapers supported Neville Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement. When Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia in March 1938 he sent a telegram to Adolf Hitler saying: "My dear Fuhrer everyone in England is profoundly moved by the bloodless solution to the Czechoslovakian problem. People not so much concerned with territorial readjustment as with dread of another war with its accompanying bloodbath. Frederick the Great was a great popular figure. I salute your excellency's star which rises higher and higher."
And the Mirror carried not dissimilar articles back then.
As did the Magazine of the Peace Pledge Union - the White Poppy people.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
Cameron is doing a fine job of destroying his legacy all on his own
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
So you're hoping for a Bloomberg win then?!
(Damn good book, btw)
I still don't quite know how to price Bloomberg. He was definitely value @ 800-1000 when I backed him, but right now I haven't really got a clue as to what his odds should be.
There seem to be willing backers at ~60-90/1 so I could lay off my profit in return for ~£650.
It's financially worthwhile for me to spend a bit of time figuring out whether or not to lay it off, perhaps I'll devote tomorrow evening to that pleasant task.
I'll post my conclusion and reasoning on here.
I would reckon that Bloomberg's ceiling as a third party candidate would be 20% of the vote, so anything over a 1% chance of winning is too much.
I agree, Bloomberg's chances are very small, and now that Hillary won the coin toss in Iowa it's even slimmer that he will even run.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
I certainly cannot see much to get excited about with Rubio. Cruz is looking good. If Trump gets scalped in New Hampshire then he is doomed.
I've noticed a tendency on PB to rubbish Rubio. I'll admit, the debate format has not allowed him to shine. But for those who know him beyond just the debates, of all the people in both parties running, he is the most natural politician.
In an election cycle with a rebellious electorate, that may be a burden rather than an asset. If he gets the nomination, he will be a handful for Hillary. Or Bernie.
I can't see a damaged Hillary losing to the fresh, clean cut Rubio. And Bernie? Don't make me laugh. Against any Democrat, he has to be a 65-75% chance of getting the Presidency. (And Bloomberg would definitely not run if Rubio was the Republican candidate.)
Cruz on the other hand would probably lose to Hillary. He has no appeal in the rust belt, and no appeal on the coasts. That's a fatal lack of support against a credible opponent. (He would, I would admit, probably beat Bernie.)
Trump: I reckon could win against most Democrats, although he's an incredible wild card who could massively outperform or underperform expectations.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
So you're hoping for a Bloomberg win then?!
(Damn good book, btw)
I still don't quite know how to price Bloomberg. He was definitely value @ 800-1000 when I backed him, but right now I haven't really got a clue as to what his odds should be.
There seem to be willing backers at ~60-90/1 so I could lay off my profit in return for ~£650.
It's financially worthwhile for me to spend a bit of time figuring out whether or not to lay it off, perhaps I'll devote tomorrow evening to that pleasant task.
I'll post my conclusion and reasoning on here.
I would reckon that Bloomberg's ceiling as a third party candidate would be 20% of the vote, so anything over a 1% chance of winning is too much.
I agree, Bloomberg's chances are very small, and now that Hillary won the coin toss in Iowa it's even slimmer that he will even run.
Bloomberg needs:
1. Cruz or Trump as the Republican nominee 2. The Hillary email scandal to sink her
*And* this all has to happen by end March.
2% is definitely too high. 1% is probably about right.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
So you're hoping for a Bloomberg win then?!
(Damn good book, btw)
I still don't quite know how to price Bloomberg. He was definitely value @ 800-1000 when I backed him, but right now I haven't really got a clue as to what his odds should be.
There seem to be willing backers at ~60-90/1 so I could lay off my profit in return for ~£650.
It's financially worthwhile for me to spend a bit of time figuring out whether or not to lay it off, perhaps I'll devote tomorrow evening to that pleasant task.
I'll post my conclusion and reasoning on here.
Thanks for posting that. Appreciated.
I'm on Bloomberg at about 300s for a few tens of £££. A neophyte deciding what to do.
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
I'm increasingly sympathetic towards Jeremy Hunt since he became a hate figure.
Hunt knows a lot. He recommends Dr google for children with rashes...
Since we seem to have returned to the doctors' strike could someone kindly answer a conundrum that has been bugging me for days. I know the strike is not about money. I also know that the main point of disagreement is how much the doctors should be paid for working on Saturdays. Can anyone explain in a few words this apparent contradiction.
So you are taking as much of this Trump @ 4.2 as you can?
Selling Hillary at 2s for POTUS, buying Trump at 4s for the Republican nomination: both are amazing bets.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
Putting her FBI issues to one side, Rubio would allow Hillary to play to her strengths. If she essentially reruns her primary campaign against Obama ('who do you want to take the 3am phonecall' etc) she wins. Rubio is a charisma free zone and can be portrayed as not yet ready for the Presidency. This certainly won't be the last chance that America will get to elect him to the White House.
I certainly cannot see much to get excited about with Rubio. Cruz is looking good. If Trump gets scalped in New Hampshire then he is doomed.
I've noticed a tendency on PB to rubbish Rubio. I'll admit, the debate format has not allowed him to shine. But for those who know him beyond just the debates, of all the people in both parties running, he is the most natural politician.
In an election cycle with a rebellious electorate, that may be a burden rather than an asset. If he gets the nomination, he will be a handful for Hillary. Or Bernie.
I can't see a damaged Hillary losing to the fresh, clean cut Rubio. And Bernie? Don't make me laugh. Against any Democrat, he has to be a 65-75% chance of getting the Presidency. (And Bloomberg would definitely not run if Rubio was the Republican candidate.)
Cruz on the other hand would probably lose to Hillary. He has no appeal in the rust belt, and no appeal on the coasts. That's a fatal lack of support against a credible opponent. (He would, I would admit, probably beat Bernie.)
Trump: I reckon could win against most Democrats, although he's an incredible wild card who could massively outperform or underperform expectations.
Rubio makes Romney look like a human, that said if Romney couldn't beat Obama when the economy was worse then how can Rubio do better?
The media is currently in the bag for Rubio just like they were for Romney, but that lasts only during the nomination period, in the GE they will abandon him like they usually do with republicans.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
I'm increasingly sympathetic towards Jeremy Hunt since he became a hate figure.
Hunt knows a lot. He recommends Dr google for children with rashes...
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
Rubio makes Romney look like a human, that said if Romney couldn't beat Obama when the economy was worse then how can Rubio do better?
The media is currently in the bag for Rubio just like they were for Romney, but that lasts only during the nomination period, in the GE they will abandon him like they usually do with republicans.
Romney is actually an incredibly amusing guy. His best quips:
"How come the only guy running for the nomination with only one wife is the Mormon?"
When asked about gay marriage: "I believe marriage is a sacred vow between a man and a woman... and a woman... and a woman..."
I don't think Gove would be a good figurehead for Leave. Gove inspires surprisingly intense dislike amongst non-Conservatives.
I like Gove, but Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) told Dave to pull Gove from Education as he would cost Dave a majority.
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
I pretty much agree with all of that. It's because I rate him myself that it jars with me when people say, out of nothing, that they "loathe that vile man" and so on. It's easy to become a hate figure as a politician, especially if you look a bit odd.
He seems to lack some presentation skills — when he wanted to big up the King James bible which almost everyone (at least most of the C of E and protestant sects) even R.Dawkins agrees we should read as a valuable part of British culture and history.. he managed to antagonise everyone
That's always going to be dangerous territory, I think. People - many of them at least - think of culture and the arts as existing on a higher plane than politics. A politician making recommendations as to culture may seem to be getting ideas above himself. It's not that he's wrong it's that he is seen as a mundane creature who has no business talking about the sublime.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
Rotherham council and Savile era bbc thinking (
Maybe he simply doesn't think it's as important as you think it is, relative to the rest of David Cameron's achievements.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
Cameron is doing a fine job of destroying his legacy all on his own
The future of this country is bigger than the career of one man.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
Rotherham council and Savile era bbc thinking (
Maybe he simply doesn't think it's as important as you think it is, relative to the rest of David Cameron's achievements.
If it's not that important, it won't ruin his legacy will it?
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
That's really damning. Cares more about a mate's place in history than the wellbeing of 65 million people...
So you are taking as much of this Trump @ 4.2 as you can?
Selling Hillary at 2s for POTUS, buying Trump at 4s for the Republican nomination: both are amazing bets.
I also bought Rubio pre-iowa on SPIN @10 for £10 per pt.
Buy Rubio for POTUS (as he'd wipe the floor with Hillary and pretty much every likely Democratic candidate). Sell Hillary for POTUS. Buy Trump for the nomination.
P.
I certainly cannot see much to get excited about with Rubio. Cruz is looking good. If Trump gets scalped in New Hampshire then he is doomed.
I've noticed a tendency on PB to rubbish Rubio. .
I can't see a damaged Hillary losing to the fresh, clean cut Rubio. And Bernie? Don't make me laugh. Against any Democrat, he has to be a 65-75% chance of getting the Presidency. (And Bloomberg would definitely not run if Rubio was the Republican candidate.)
Cruz on the other hand would probably lose to Hillary. He has no appeal in the rust belt, and no appeal on the coasts. That's a fatal lack of support against a credible opponent. (He would, I would admit, probably beat Bernie.)
Trump: I reckon could win against most Democrats, although he's an incredible wild card who could massively outperform or underperform expectations.
Rubio makes Romney look like a human, that said if Romney couldn't beat Obama when the economy was worse then how can Rubio do better?
The media is currently in the bag for Rubio just like they were for Romney, but that lasts only during the nomination period, in the GE they will abandon him like they usually do with republicans.
I think Rubio is, actually, the "best" candidate. The trouble is he looks all sheeny, shiny and Establishment-like, even though he's Right-wing (except on immigration) - his content isn't obvious unless you dig for it too, and his style - together with his family backstories - remind me more of Tony Blair than anyone else.
It means his Conservatism just doesn't cut through and, to be brutal about it, a Hispanic candidate for the Republican nomination just has to go that bit further on reassuring about immigration from mainly Hispanic countries this year.
Rubio can't do that, even those he's belatedly trying, because he hasn't. And he knows it.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
Rotherham council and Savile era bbc thinking (
Maybe he simply doesn't think it's as important as you think it is, relative to the rest of David Cameron's achievements.
If it's not that important, it won't ruin his legacy will it?
No, I can't see the government having any problems if there's a Leave vote. /irony
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
One of the most pathetic excuses for taking a side. Going against everything you believe in to save the legacy of a work colleague.
That's really damning. Cares more about a mate's place in history than the wellbeing of 65 million people...
E.M. Forster — 'If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.'
Well I know Dylan Hartley's likely to be sent off but surely England must have a vice-captain to talk to the referee after that happens.
I'm not interested in rugby any more.
The events of last autumn have burned me, then Eddie Jones appointing Hartley as captain has convinced me Jones is over here to feck English rugby for the next few decades.
I'm not complaining, but is it me, or have the betting markets mahoosively overreacted to the Iowa result?
I've done a small "Glencore" on Rubio.
As an aside, when (if) do you think the referendum market will come alive on Betfair.
Very little matched when compared to the GOP/Dem nomination/Next President markets.
That's because there is a metric tonne of free money in the US markets, and very little value in the referendum market.
Incidentally, is it just me or does anyone else think Robert's comments on 'free money' seem just that little bit more sinister with his latest avatar....?
The Times also reporting Labour MPs are worried Corbyn might not back Remain with the enthusiasm a Labour leader should.
I remain utterly baffled by how, for so many Labour MPs, the EU is apparently now one of their top "red-line" priorities.
Last summer, they were all too happy to vote for cuts to poor people's incomes in the name of supposed "electability", yet any suggestion of them not being wildly pro-EU (despite the many signs that such a stance will cause the party problems) and they're appalled.
But that didn't get the avalanche of negativity that those two speeches did.
True but on those grounds you'd have to include things like Tebbit's anecdote about his father getting on his bike and that clearly wasn't an awful speech.
That Lilley speech helped define 'the nasty party' that Theresa May later tried to make people move away from.
The Times also reporting Labour MPs are worried Corbyn might not back Remain with the enthusiasm a Labour leader should.
I remain utterly baffled by how, for so many Labour MPs, the EU is apparently now one of their top "red-line" priorities.
Last summer, they were all too happy to vote for cuts to poor people's incomes in the name of supposed "electability", yet any suggestion of them not being wildly pro-EU (despite the many signs that such a stance will cause the party problems) and they're appalled.
It means losing the Social Chapter provisions, means the workers and the poor get shafted, if I read that article right.
Comments
Attackers might be trying to steal your information from www.nojam.com (for example, passwords, messages, or credit cards). NET::ERR_CERT_INVALID"
I know the site is fine. It is just my Chrome doing stupid things.
Corbyn and Farage the faces of Leave, Dave can't be that lucky can he?
A fat, foreign, ethnic woman...
Ticked all the boxes.
Compared to that...it's bad, but it's not that bad
Still, better late than never. What's she up to these days, did it mention? With financial skills like hers she could get a job in defence procurement or designing government IT systems.
And the money is easy come easy go.
"(The HRA) aim was to incorporate into UK law the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights. The Act makes a remedy for breach of a Convention right available in UK courts, without the need to go to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg.
In particular, the Act makes it unlawful for any public body to act in a way which is incompatible with the Convention, unless the wording of any other primary legislation provides no other choice. It also requires the judiciary (including tribunals) to take account of any decisions, judgment or opinion of the European Court of Human Rights, and to interpret legislation, as far as possible, in a way which is compatible with Convention rights. However, if it is not possible to interpret an Act of Parliament so as to make it compatible with the Convention, the judges are not allowed to override it. All they can do is issue a declaration of incompatibility. .. However, judges may strike down secondary legislation. "
From Conservative Manifesto:
"We will scrap Labour's Human Rights Act and introduce
a British Bill of Rights which will restore common sense
to the application of human rights in the UK. The Bill
will remain faithful to the basic principles of human
rights, which we signed up to in the original European
Convention on Human Rights. It will protect basic rights,
like the right to a fair trial, and the right to life, which are
an essential part of a modern democratic society. But it will
reverse the mission creep that has meant human rights law
being used for more and more purposes, and often with
little regard for the rights of wider society"
If (and it's a big if) it is as billed it will tack our towards a written constitution, which would have primacy over decisions of the ECHR, and oblige our judges to consider that in a way they are currently not because we don't have one and the law basically says "Obey Strasbourg", unless parliament directly says otherwise in primary legislation.
It's probably worth noting I did start with a reasonable bankroll - my max exposure at betfair went up to about -£1k in early Jan.
It's against the law, innit?
Bluntly my impression is that they are all crap and this could be the most inept election since Tilden vs Hayes in 1876.
42% Remain
58% Leave
https://www.nojam.com/post/550
Putting him front and centre of the Leave campaign might not be the best idea, and I'm someone who thinks Gove is the best Home/Justice Secretary we've had in decades.
That's strong stuff.
Huzzah for The Black Shirts Paul Dacre
(That is not a reference to Eoin O'Duffy. PS, iPhones can suck when it comes to emoticons.)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3430650/Deliciously-Ella-says-s-cool-father-MP-Shaun-Woodward-happiness-man-vowing-ll-wedding.html
There seem to be willing backers at ~60-90/1 so I could lay off my profit in return for ~£650.
It's financially worthwhile for me to spend a bit of time figuring out whether or not to lay it off, perhaps I'll devote tomorrow evening to that pleasant task.
I'll post my conclusion and reasoning on here.
He could run as an Independent if he thinks the GOP has stolen the nomination from him.
In the 1930s the Daily Mail was quite pro appeasement, and hailed the Munich agreement as a triumph. It has a history of getting it wrong on Europe:
Rothermere and his newspapers supported Neville Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement. When Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia in March 1938 he sent a telegram to Adolf Hitler saying: "My dear Fuhrer everyone in England is profoundly moved by the bloodless solution to the Czechoslovakian problem. People not so much concerned with territorial readjustment as with dread of another war with its accompanying bloodbath. Frederick the Great was a great popular figure. I salute your excellency's star which rises higher and higher."
I remember Iowa was basically
Very Conservative = Ted Cruz
Quite Conservative = Rubio
Moderate = Trump
In an election cycle with a rebellious electorate, that may be a burden rather than an asset. If he gets the nomination, he will be a handful for Hillary. Or Bernie.
He is intellectually convinced of the case for leaving but worried about contributing to a campaign that would wreck Mr Cameron’s legacy, friends said. His discomfort is said to be heightened by the prime minister’s demand that he presents plans for a new court to defend Britain against new EU laws, which he believes to be unworkable.
But at least you are a PB member.
As did the Magazine of the Peace Pledge Union - the White Poppy people.
Cruz on the other hand would probably lose to Hillary. He has no appeal in the rust belt, and no appeal on the coasts. That's a fatal lack of support against a credible opponent. (He would, I would admit, probably beat Bernie.)
Trump: I reckon could win against most Democrats, although he's an incredible wild card who could massively outperform or underperform expectations.
1. Cruz or Trump as the Republican nominee
2. The Hillary email scandal to sink her
*And* this all has to happen by end March.
2% is definitely too high. 1% is probably about right.
I'm on Bloomberg at about 300s for a few tens of £££. A neophyte deciding what to do.
The media is currently in the bag for Rubio just like they were for Romney, but that lasts only during the nomination period, in the GE they will abandon him like they usually do with republicans.
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/skin-rash-children/Pages/Introduction.aspx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWl6TLvlFEk
Goodnight.
"How come the only guy running for the nomination with only one wife is the Mormon?"
When asked about gay marriage:
"I believe marriage is a sacred vow between a man and a woman... and a woman... and a woman..."
At least, I think that's part of the problem.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/12139220/Anti-Rhodes-campaign-depleted-student-union-cash.html
Very little matched when compared to the GOP/Dem nomination/Next President markets.
It means his Conservatism just doesn't cut through and, to be brutal about it, a Hispanic candidate for the Republican nomination just has to go that bit further on reassuring about immigration from mainly Hispanic countries this year.
Rubio can't do that, even those he's belatedly trying, because he hasn't. And he knows it.
The events of last autumn have burned me, then Eddie Jones appointing Hartley as captain has convinced me Jones is over here to feck English rugby for the next few decades.
https://www.facebook.com/no.offence.magazine
https://www.facebook.com/spikedonline/videos/1012576888785439/
They were banned by the Oxford Student's Union. I hope they go far.
Which was the worst Tory Party conference speech?
The quiet man speech by IDS or Portillo's 'Who Dares Win' speech.
:-)
Last summer, they were all too happy to vote for cuts to poor people's incomes in the name of supposed "electability", yet any suggestion of them not being wildly pro-EU (despite the many signs that such a stance will cause the party problems) and they're appalled.
That Lilley speech helped define 'the nasty party' that Theresa May later tried to make people move away from.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YxhIq6t6Fk