Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » You’ve read the blogs, listened to the podcasts – now watch
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » You’ve read the blogs, listened to the podcasts – now watch the PB/Polling Matters TV Show
politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress
with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The First Rule of Tautlology Club is The First Rule of Tautology Club
The UK's net contribution is £153 per head whilst Norway's is £68.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm160203/debtext/160203-0001.htm#16020344000001
Trump 36
Rubio 15
Cruz 14
Bush 8
would result in 14,3,3,0 delegates
Your example gives a good lesson in how old voters can take their cue from later generations as well. Shifting social attitudes in younger people reached a tipping point, that allowed civil partnerships to be contemplated, which in turn further softened attitudes amongst older people (very many 70 year olds now would have a more liberal attitude to homosexuality, certainly than 70 year olds a generation ago and probably than themselves when they were 30 or 40), which in turn made gay marriage a natural thing. As most of us would label, a virtuous circle.
I wonder if campaigns, particularly to legalise drugs, often miss a trick in banging on, for e.g., about the current home secretary ignoring the scientific evidence &c &c. Although theirs is clearly an issue of choice rather than nature, the home secretary will never invest that kind of political capital for a small and fairly hidden societal gain in the face of tooth and nail opposition from a large part of the public, whilst flouncy scientists naively think a sheet of data somehow trumps the needs of realpolitik. The campaigners, perhaps utilising the "ex-home secretaries suddenly in favour of reform the very day they leave office" club, need to do much more ground work at a societal level first if they want to achieve the change they crave.
I have to say however that the First Rule of the Obsessives Club is there for a purpose which should never be forgotten and one which we should always be determined to follow.
It seems to have made up it's mind that it should be Rubio and therefore is very likely to be Rubio.
Remain: 44% (-3)
Leave: 21% (+3)
(via TNS-BMRB / 06 - 25 Jan)
Changes from September.
Scottish parliament voting intention (const.):
SNP: 57% (-1)
LAB: 21% (-)
CON: 17% (+5)
LDEM: 3% (-1)
(via TNS / 06 - 25 Jan)
Scottish parliament voting intention (list):
SNP: 52% (-2)
LAB: 19% (-1)
CON: 17% (+5)
LDEM: 6% (+2)
GRN: 6% (-3)
(via TNS / 06 - 25 Jan)
Even Scotland's moving towards Leave.
Still 2:1 in favour of Remain in North Britain
1. Rubio is considered the most electable Republican
2. Rubio was understated in the polls in Iowa
3. Rubio is considered to have "The Big Mo"
If the NH poll is correct, and there is a 20 point lead for Trump over Rubio, then the "Rubio is understated" argument goes away, as does "the Big Mo". People would suddenly start to believe that Trump was going to win three of the first four states. It would also suddenly make it clear that Rubio still has a mountain to climb.
On the other hand, if the result in Trump 28, Rubio 23, then I think the current odds continue.
Disclaimer: I claim absolutely no expertise in US political matters.
I guess they would rather be ruled by Brussels than London.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/04/opinion/campaign-stops/the-plausibility-of-ted-cruz.html?ref=opinion
I think, for him to have a realistic path to the nomination, he needed Cruz to be weakened. All the signs are that Rubio was the second choice of the evangelical vote, due to his wholesome image and "sound" positions on abortion, gay rights, etc. Had he managed to unite the evangelicals with the "country club"/Establishment Republican vote, he could've had a coalition big enough to overcome Trump's blue-collar voters.
On the other hand, now that Cruz is going to be seen as a strong contender until at least Super Tuesday, it puts the evangelicals out of Rubio's reach, and doesn't give him a great deal of prospects for primary wins.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_presidential_primary-3350.html
The parallel Democrat poll shows Sanders up on the previous poll though down compared with the last poll from the same institute - hard to read, but Sanders still clearly going to win in NH, as Clinton has conceded in advance. A new South Carolina poll would be handy.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html
I'd like to see a little more NH post-Iowa polling but if Trump's numbers are still holding up then this weekend will be a good time to back the Donald for the nomination.
But Rubio can't win without a collapse in the Trump vote. Now, it may be that that will happen but a lot of people seem to have made their mind up on him in NH and I can't really see why that would change now. It's not just Trump who would likely turn his fire on Rubio if the Floridan starts to poll very well, Cruz will too. How well Rubio will stand up to negative campaigning remains to be seen; there's not been all that much so far, I think.
My impression from Iowa is that Rubio was the fortunate beneficiary of Cruz's vote migrating after the Canada birth issue, rather than it being a pro-Rubio prompt. That might not matter; others have made good on a lucky break before and being in the right place at the right time matters, and he was. But he's still an very long way back.
Personally I haven't a clue who is going to win, there is a deep seams of untapped pissed-offness in the country, just as there is an the USA powering Trump's current adventure. When Mr WVM has some nice Guardianista girl on the phone asking if he is planning on voting leave, is he going to tell her what she wants to hear ? Is he going to look a the government monstering his buy-to-let and decided quietly between himself and his other half that actually the government is all together too self satisfied and it needs a good kick ? Is he going to look at the drop in his daily rate over the last few years, and his wifes long wait to see the doctor, and decide that there is no risk of Alex Salmond this time and actually that chap Farage has got it right. I don't know, you don't know.. interesting times.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us; but do not quite forget,
For we are the people of England, that never has spoken yet.
It's easy to see the potential Cruz states: they are the Santorum states and the Huckabee states, cutting a swathe up the centre of the US. (Plus, potentially, Texas.)
The vast bulk of these states elect their delegates proportionally. So, even if Cruz wins all of them, with 50% of the vote, then he'll only collect 60% of the delegates. That will get him to 15% of the delegates.
By contrast Florida, New York and California are all "winner takes all states". If Rubio were to win every state Santorum did, he would get around 270 delegates. If Rubio were to win his home state of Florida plus California, he'd get the same number.
The trouble for Rubio is that of the three candidates who effectively skipped Iowa to focus on New Hampshire — Bush, Christie, and Kasich — the most formidable opponent is the one he has the most interest in taking down: Bush. Bush’s Right to Rise Super PAC has been hammering Rubio to the point where it seems possible that Rubio’s numbers have been artificially low for months, and Bush and his Super PAC still have sufficient funding to continue. Many party leaders and pundits say Rubio is the likeliest GOP nominee at this point, but all that could go up in smoke if he sags badly in New Hampshire and allows one or more of the Bush-Christie-Kasich troika to move up and on.
Rubio had better be ready for the Saturday Republican debate — he arguably will be the top target of everyone else on stage. In fact, so many candidates have so much at stake in New Hampshire that they’d all better buckle on their armor. The incoming fire is guaranteed to be withering.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
2016 is a big anti establishment year. People in the West hate their elites. That's as far as I have got with this.
Stuart Rose gets a big laugh for mocking his memory loss. "It could have been worse, I could has been CEO of S&M". Credit to J.McGrory...
A fly on the wall documentary of that tour would be hilarious. A sort of political Spinal Tap.
Woozers....if google translate of the link within the link is correct....unfortunately my knowledge of hebrew is the square root of sod all, so I have no idea if google translate is correctly translating one particular paragraph in the article...
We wish .@vote_leave and .@LeaveEUOfficial well in their collaboration and look forward to a strong united campaign emerging.
New Hampshire GOP poll (UMass/7News): Trump 36, Rubio 15, Cruz 14, Bush 8, Kasich 7. Rubio up 7% since Monday: https://t.co/QkT989O7PV
I don't think it is. The delegate count is going to look pretty ugly for Cruz by the end of March.
Firstly it's important to note that it wasn't an election - merely an exercise put on by 2 groups of private people, the Iowa Democrats and the Iowa Republicans.
The Republican exercise was straight forward: turn up, listen and hold a secret ballot. Results published and move on.
The Democratic one was much more complex. They don't publish voting numbers, merely the assigned delegate proportions, using a very complex formula.
It was observed that Hillary won mainly rural caucuses while Bernie won mainly urban districts and college towns. We know that Hillary won by 5 caucuses. It is entirely possible that Bernie got more of the popular vote, which isn't published.
There were 6 precincts that were decided on a coin toss. Hillary won all 6.
So Hillary won Iowa on a coin toss - is it time to retool this farce or what?
Criminals with UK children cannot be automatically deported, says EU court
Theresa May told she cannot expel Moroccan woman with British-born son simply because of conviction
The advocate general of the European court of justice has told May that it will be contrary to EU law if she automatically expels or refuses a residence permit to a non-EU national with a criminal record who is a parent of a child who is an EU citizen.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/04/theresa-may-cant-deport-moroccan-mother-with-criminal-record-eu-court
So basically, get into an EU, have a kid asap, sorted...EU permit residence for life.
Barrel scraping much?
NEW REPORT: #Campaign2016 – 91% of Americans getting news; divided over most helpful source https://t.co/6q8xoQbx7q https://t.co/Vf6qOAk7s7
83% of 18-29 year-olds getting news abt #Campaign2016 - 35% say SNS most helpful source https://t.co/6q8xoQbx7q https://t.co/thpShbiA5G
The social network bias for young voters is very significant vs others, one to be wary of as in UK too
Today's hot topic - is Hillary a 'progressive' or not. Yup, it's that bad.
Chairman ROFLMAO
Leave EU
Over 420,000 are now following @LeaveEUOfficial on Facebook. Only 2000 behind Labour.
#Brexit
#LeaveEU
BANK OF ENGLAND projects inflation to remain below 1% for all of 2016 and reach 2% target only by the first quarter of 2018
Just watch the commons when we have debates on these subjects,most labour MP's never criticize,infact if you pushed them,they want more.
Few Americans following election news consider print versions of newspapers helpful source types https://t.co/Tc50YqeTG3
On the QT line-up, I actually think I'm going to watch it tonight, for the first time in an age. I used to habitually watch QT and This Week on Thursday nights, however in the last two years, I've gradually gotten bored with both. QT has become particularly tiresome. Still Farage vs four women, especially a Tory moderate like Rudd and Isabel Oakeshott, is popcorn worthy.
On Osborne, I think MaxPB in the previous thread mentioned him not being popular in London. That's not surprising - I don't think many people outside of the political bubble really see Osborne as a moderate, despite him being a mild eurosceptic and having socially liberal views on some topics. On top of that, among people I know, I've not found many people who actually like Osborne. He comes off as a pretty dislikable figure. Whereas everyone seems to like Boris (well, except Michael Portillo).
Moving pictures? What manner of sorcery is this?!
Ms. Apocalypse, Oakeshott's a fool. Doubt I'll watch Question Time. The fact the clown Jess Philips got applause (apparently) for claiming Cologne-style attacks happen all the time in Birmingham betrays the audience is about as representative of Britain as a niche Facebook clique.
In a way, though, I don't think we need to speculate too far. It seems to me that the most obvious ploy is to lay Rubio at the current odds; it will only require him to stumble in NH for the odds to shift out, whereas I can't see them shifting in much beyond what we're currently seeing.
DYOR, what do I know?, etc etc!
On the Jess Philips thing, I'm shocked she got an applause. While I don't doubt sexual assault and rape does happen in Birmingham, and indeed probably can happen in crowds or groups, the kind of mass attacks planned by up to a thousand men in front of women's fathers, boyfriends, and husbands I would think are incredibly rare there.