"It is a very odd prison, if that's what it is, in which the prisoners all have a say in the rules." In the EU prison we act like Godber whilst France and Germany act like Harry Grout.
Aren't there prisons in the Philippines and South America where the authorities basically let the gangs run them as long as they don't leave and don't kill anyone? It's not a bad analogy if Boris was thinking of one of those.
Boris was interrupted a lot because he gave long, rambling andwers to questions that he wasn't asked. He was all over the place. I thought Marr was far too gentle with him (probably why Boris went on in the first place). A Paxman or a Neil would have eaten him alive.
I think Boris problem is getting on the Tory ballot. He's not too popular with MPs as far as I can see. Osborne will presumably try anything he can to get an-other on the ballot.
Indeed, if it is Leave Boris probably becomes leader regardless, perhaps with Gove as Chancellor, if it is a big Remain Osborne is likely to be the next leader. If it is a narrow Remain, the most likely outcome, Boris stil has a good chance but Osborne will also fancy his chances and will try and get someone else on the ballot against him, eg if Osborne can get MPs to put Gove in the final two against him as the Brexit candidate Osborne would probably win with the membership as Gove polls even worse with the public than him
Is Osborne a master of mind control then?
He is a master of electoral powerplay, far more than Boris and has been courting MPs for years, Gove is also more popular with MPs than Boris which could help him through to the final two
Courting MPs should definitely help him, but the problem with being a backroom manipulator and schemer, operating in the dark, is sometimes when it is time for all to act in the light, the schemes fall apart and people do not act as they otherwise would. Or to put it another way, how firm is the support he has courted, should things really turn against him, economically or otherwise?
It is by no means guaranteed but Osborne certainly has a good chance of ensuring MPs put him through to the final round with Gove and knock out Boris
It worked for Brown in no small part because Labour MPs nominations are public and so he could see which promises were not being kept / favours did not have be returned. Osborne will have no such advantage.
Osborne has been courting MPs even more assidiously than Brown and he has the advantage that Gove is more popular with MPs than Boris, I could well see Osborne coming top amongst MPs in the final round with Gove knocking out Boris to set up a ballot of Osborne v Gove to be sent to the membership
I think Boris problem is getting on the Tory ballot. He's not too popular with MPs as far as I can see. Osborne will presumably try anything he can to get an-other on the ballot.
Indeed, if it is Leave Boris probably becomes leader regardless, perhaps with Gove as Chancellor, if it is a big Remain Osborne is likely to be the next leader. If it is a narrow Remain, the most likely outcome, Boris stil has a good chance but Osborne will also fancy his chances and will try and get someone else on the ballot against him, eg if Osborne can get MPs to put Gove in the final two against him as the Brexit candidate Osborne would probably win with the membership as Gove polls even worse with the public than him
Is Osborne a master of mind control then?
He is a master of electoral powerplay, far more than Boris and has been courting MPs for years, Gove is also more popular with MPs than Boris which could help him through to the final two
Courting MPs should definitely help him, but the problem with being a backroom manipulator and schemer, operating in the dark, is sometimes when it is time for all to act in the light, the schemes fall apart and people do not act as they otherwise would. Or to put it another way, how firm is the support he has courted, should things really turn against him, economically or otherwise?
It is by no means guaranteed but Osborne certainly has a good chance of ensuring MPs put him through to the final round with Gove and knock out Boris
It worked for Brown in no small part because Labour MPs nominations are public and so he could see which promises were not being kept / favours did not have be returned. Osborne will have no such advantage.
Osborne has been courting MPs even more assidiously than Brown and he has the advantage that Gove is more popular with MPs than Boris, I could well see Osborne coming top amongst MPs in the final round with Gove knocking out Boris to set up a ballot of Osborne v Gove to be sent to the membership
I think Boris problem is getting on the Tory ballot. He's not too popular with MPs as far as I can see. Osborne will presumably try anything he can to get an-other on the ballot.
Indeed, if it is Leave Boris probably becomes leader regardless, perhaps with Gove as Chancellor, if it is a big Remain Osborne is likely to be the next leader. If it is a narrow Remain, the most likely outcome, Boris stil has a good chance but Osborne will also fancy his chances and will try and get someone else on the ballot against him, eg if Osborne can get MPs to put Gove in the final two against him as the Brexit candidate Osborne would probably win with the membership as Gove polls even worse with the public than him
Is Osborne a master of mind control then?
He is a master of electoral powerplay, far more than Boris and has been courting MPs for years, Gove is also more popular with MPs than Boris which could help him through to the final two
Courting MPs should definitely help him, but the problem with being a backroom manipulator and schemer, operating in the dark, is sometimes when it is time for all to act in the light, the schemes fall apart and people do not act as they otherwise would. Or to put it another way, how firm is the support he has courted, should things really turn against him, economically or otherwise?
It is by no means guaranteed but Osborne certainly has a good chance of ensuring MPs put him through to the final round with Gove and knock out Boris
It worked for Brown in no small part because Labour MPs nominations are public and so he could see which promises were not being kept / favours did not have be returned. Osborne will have no such advantage.
Osborne has been courting MPs even more assidiously than Brown and he has the advantage that Gove is more popular with MPs than Boris, I could well see Osborne coming top amongst MPs in the final round with Gove knocking out Boris to set up a ballot of Osborne v Gove to be sent to the membership
Strangely all four candidates left in can be backed for around 93% and even including the whole list around 98-99%. Is there a very small risk that a brokered convention leads to a selection that is not on the list, or is this free money?
Yes, I'd think there's a risk. If Trump and Cruz were seen as unacceptable and Kasich too liberal, they might fancy a "unifier" who hadn't been involved in the bloodletting.
Kasich isn't really a liberal Nick. He's played his campaign to the centre, but the only actual centrist in the GOP race was Chris Christie. He's to the right of Romney/McCain on the issues I think...
Rubio is almost as right wing as Cruz !
Kasich has said he accepts climate change and the verdict of the Supreme Court on gay marriage, he is left of Romney and certainly the most centrist candidate left in the race
Kasich cut off funds to Planned Parenthood in Ohio; he is further to the right than he makes out. What is unusual is that Kasich has set out to defy the conventional wisdom that candidates pander to the right in the primaries then tack back to the centre for the election.
Sensible for him though whenthe field is so empty in the centre. You run to where the votes are.
Sadly, there is no forum in today's dumbed down media, where someone like Boris Johnson is given the time to try to formulate a reasonable answer to a question. The constant interruptions are a real turn-off. Yes, he could have some media training but why should he play their game? I'd actually like to see politicians stand up to some of these broadcaster's like Marr.
It's no coincidence that Andrew Neil struggles to get government ministers on his programmes and I don't believe it's because he is that good. The constant bombardment of "statistics" (his props) is another turn-off for me. The BBC should bring back his programme "Hard Talk" where he interviewed politicians on a one-to-one basis for (I think it was an hour). Even today, it's much more interesting listening to the older politicians like Heseltine, Lamont, Howard, they developed their skills in what seems like another age. Unlike the "soundbite" politcians of today.
I'm having a rant today but I know nothing is going to change!
Strangely all four candidates left in can be backed for around 93% and even including the whole list around 98-99%. Is there a very small risk that a brokered convention leads to a selection that is not on the list, or is this free money?
Yes, I'd think there's a risk. If Trump and Cruz were seen as unacceptable and Kasich too liberal, they might fancy a "unifier" who hadn't been involved in the bloodletting.
Kasich isn't really a liberal Nick. He's played his campaign to the centre, but the only actual centrist in the GOP race was Chris Christie. He's to the right of Romney/McCain on the issues I think...
Rubio is almost as right wing as Cruz !
Kasich has said he accepts climate change and the verdict of the Supreme Court on gay marriage, he is left of Romney and certainly the most centrist candidate left in the race
All things are relative - I said "too liberal for GOP voters". And I tink he's been quite breave to defend some of the positions. He's way too interventionist abroad for my taste (arms to Ukraine??), as is Clinton, but that won't be a problem for most Republicans.
I think Boris problem is getting on the Tory ballot. He's not too popular with MPs as far as I can see. Osborne will presumably try anything he can to get an-other on the ballot.
Indeed, if it is Leave Boris probably becomes leader regardless, perhaps with Gove as Chancellor, if it is a big Remain Osborne is likely to be the next leader. If it is a narrow Remain, the most likely outcome, Boris stil has a good chance but Osborne will also fancy his chances and will try and get someone else on the ballot against him, eg if Osborne can get MPs to put Gove in the final two against him as the Brexit candidate Osborne would probably win with the membership as Gove polls even worse with the public than him
Is Osborne a master of mind control then?
He is a master of electoral powerplay, far more than Boris and has been courting MPs for years, Gove is also more popular with MPs than Boris which could help him through to the final two
Courting MPs should definitely help him, but the problem with being a backroom manipulator and schemer, operating in the dark, is sometimes when it is time for all to act in the light, the schemes fall apart and people do not act as they otherwise would. Or to put it another way, how firm is the support he has courted, should things really turn against him, economically or otherwise?
It is by no means guaranteed but Osborne certainly has a good chance of ensuring MPs put him through to the final round with Gove and knock out Boris
It worked for Brown in no small part because Labour MPs nominations are public and so he could see which promises were not being kept / favours did not have be returned. Osborne will have no such advantage.
Osborne has been courting MPs even more assidiously than Brown and he has the advantage that Gove is more popular with MPs than Boris, I could well see Osborne coming top amongst MPs in the final round with Gove knocking out Boris to set up a ballot of Osborne v Gove to be sent to the membership
I'd vote for Gove.
Me too
A qualified yes from me too...much depends on how he behaves in the weeks ahead. Love may be withdrawn.
I think Boris problem is getting on the Tory ballot. He's not too popular with MPs as far as I can see. Osborne will presumably try anything he can to get an-other on the ballot.
Indeed, if it is Leave Boris probably becomes leader regardless, perhaps with Gove as Chancellor, if it is a big Remain Osborne is likely to be the next leader. If it is a narrow Remain, the most likely outcome, Boris stil has a good chance but Osborne will also fancy his chances and will try and get someone else on the ballot against him, eg if Osborne can get MPs to put Gove in the final two against him as the Brexit candidate Osborne would probably win with the membership as Gove polls even worse with the public than him
Is Osborne a master of mind control then?
He is a master of electoral powerplay, far more than Boris and has been courting MPs for years, Gove is also more popular with MPs than Boris which could help him through to the final two
Courting MPs should definitely help him, but the problem with being a backroom manipulator and schemer, operating in the dark, is sometimes when it is time for all to act in the light, the schemes fall apart and people do not act as they otherwise would. Or to put it another way, how firm is the support he has courted, should things really turn against him, economically or otherwise?
It is by no means guaranteed but Osborne certainly has a good chance of ensuring MPs put him through to the final round with Gove and knock out Boris
It worked for Brown in no small part because Labour MPs nominations are public and so he could see which promises were not being kept / favours did not have be returned. Osborne will have no such advantage.
Osborne has been courting MPs even more assidiously than Brown and he has the advantage that Gove is more popular with MPs than Boris, I could well see Osborne coming top amongst MPs in the final round with Gove knocking out Boris to set up a ballot of Osborne v Gove to be sent to the membership
I'd vote for Gove.
It could be close but Osborne would most likely beat Gove whereas he would not beat Boris
Strangely all four candidates left in can be backed for around 93% and even including the whole list around 98-99%. Is there a very small risk that a brokered convention leads to a selection that is not on the list, or is this free money?
Yes, I'd think there's a risk. If Trump and Cruz were seen as unacceptable and Kasich too liberal, they might fancy a "unifier" who hadn't been involved in the bloodletting.
Kasich isn't really a liberal Nick. He's played his campaign to the centre, but the only actual centrist in the GOP race was Chris Christie. He's to the right of Romney/McCain on the issues I think...
Rubio is almost as right wing as Cruz !
Kasich has said he accepts climate change and the verdict of the Supreme Court on gay marriage, he is left of Romney and certainly the most centrist candidate left in the race
All things are relative - I said "too liberal for GOP voters". And I tink he's been quite breave to defend some of the positions. He's way too interventionist abroad for my taste (arms to Ukraine??), as is Clinton, but that won't be a problem for most Republicans.
Agreed, I could vote for Kasich over Clinton, the only Republican I could say that for, I would vote for Hillary over Trump, Cruz and Rubio though I would probably vote for Rubio over Sanders too. Ironically Kasich's interventionism is also out of touch with much of the GOP base when Trump is frontrunner having denounced the Iraq War
Sadly, there is no forum in today's dumbed down media, where someone like Boris Johnson is given the time to try to formulate a reasonable answer to a question. The constant interruptions are a real turn-off. Yes, he could have some media training but why should he play their game? I'd actually like to see politicians stand up to some of these broadcaster's like Marr.
It's no coincidence that Andrew Neil struggles to get government ministers on his programmes and I don't believe it's because he is that good. The constant bombardment of "statistics" (his props) is another turn-off for me. The BBC should bring back his programme "Hard Talk" where he interviewed politicians on a one-to-one basis for (I think it was an hour). Even today, it's much more interesting listening to the older politicians like Heseltine, Lamont, Howard, they developed their skills in what seems like another age. Unlike the "soundbite" politcians of today.
I'm having a rant today but I know nothing is going to change!
Boris is a smart bloke. He knows he holds inconsistent views on the EU and he knows his previous support in favour of the EU has left many hostages to fortune. The best way to prevent that scrutiny in an interview is to talk for as long as possible. Because he's not very good at doing that coherently, though, he ended up looking silly. Throw in a pretty poor interviewer, Marr, and the whole thing becomes a waste of time. Someone like Cameron can run rings round Marr. Boris can't. He has a lot of work to do to become a convincing, premier league politician who will be taken seriously, as opposed to a political celebrity who is good at raising a chuckle from everyone.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
A notorious Islamic extremist who went on to advise Labour Ministers as a ‘reformed jihadi’ has been arrested on suspicion of funding terrorism after allegedly running a £1.2 million scam on eBay.
Hassan Butt, who once boasted of recruiting hundreds of Britons for the Taliban, is accused of conning thousands of customers out of money, after advertising and taking money for iPhones and iPads via the online auction site but never delivering the products.
The former extremist advertised the products through his company, Mi Genie, which had its own web pages on eBay. The alleged scam is believed to be one of the biggest frauds eBay has faced in the UK.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
Two out of 3 Michigan polls have Trump ahead, the ARG poll has Kasich ahead by two but it is ARG, we need more polls to see
Come on Plato, be honest, if Boris had fallen off the fence and landed on the other side you and the other BREXITERS would be slagging him off unmercifully on a daily basis.
If Boris was campaigning for REMAIN then the Remainders would be shouting about how well he had done. If you notice plenty of the LEAVE side are agreeing that he was rubbish this morning. It is the hypocritical Remainders who won't have a word said against their side.
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
Not so. Her popularity among those that will never vote Tory is irrelevant. For that matter, her rating with those who always vote Tory isn't that important. What matters is how she's she's seen by those who might or might not vote SCon.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
I'm still doubtful about a brokered convention. Trump v Cruz may look like Alien v Predator, but they have at least put themselves forward for scrutiny by the voters. If they were horribly split between three or more candidates, then maybe, but this is a two horse race going into the big winner takes all states.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
Not so. Her popularity among those that will never vote Tory is irrelevant. For that matter, her rating with those who always vote Tory isn't that important. What matters is how she's she's seen by those who might or might not vote SCon.
Spot on. -6% means she splits net 53%-47%. For a Scottish Tory, that looks very promising....
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
Agree with most of this but who is person X? I
Anyone.
It would be great if you could identify person X - and their odds!
Ash Soni, president of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, said of the hearings: "It demonstrates that where this is identified it will be dealt with.
Many of the pharmacies were in the Edgware Road area, catering to a largely Arabic client base.
And a reputable pharmacist from the area, speaking to the BBC on condition of anonymity, said it was common knowledge that unlawful sales to foreign visitors continue to this day.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
Agree with most of this but who is person X? I
Anyone.
It would be great if you could identify person X - and their odds!
Perhaps we should be looking at past precedents. How many of the eventual winners of the leadership election were frontrunners a year, or two years, before the election? And how well did the hot favourites that far out do in the actual leadership election?
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
I'm still doubtful about a brokered convention. Trump v Cruz may look like Alien v Predator, but they have at least put themselves forward for scrutiny by the voters. If they were horribly split between three or more candidates, then maybe, but this is a two horse race going into the big winner takes all states.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
I rate a convention much higher than 5% (I give it at the moment 33%) simply because Trump's early strength denied Cruz a lot of delegates. As a result Cruz needs to not only beat Trump by large margins from now till March 15th but also to win most of the big ones in the North ( Ohio, Pennsylvania, N.Y) and California, which are more Trump and Kasich territory. Also lets not discount Trump's weakness from now on.
Long story short, Trump is doing a bad enough finish that he might fall short of victory and Cruz might had a bad enough start to also fall short of victory.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
You seriously think that the field beyond Trump and Cruz has a one-in-three chance? It's a view, I suppose.
Trump may have taken a knock after the debate. We have no evidence as to whether this is a sustained hit. For one thing, the spotlight will now turn back very sharply to Cruz, who has more than a few questions of his own to answer on both policy and eligibility. I also doubt the notion that he can become an 'anti-Trump' bucket for the simple reason that he has far too many negatives of his own. People won't switch from, say, Kasich to him in order to stop Trump if they view Cruz as even worse.
But it will almost certainly be one or the other. Even if it goes to the convention, why on earth would either man direct his delegates to support a third candidate?
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
I'm still doubtful about a brokered convention. Trump v Cruz may look like Alien v Predator, but they have at least put themselves forward for scrutiny by the voters. If they were horribly split between three or more candidates, then maybe, but this is a two horse race going into the big winner takes all states.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
I rate a convention much higher than 5% (I give it at the moment 33%) simply because Trump's early strength denied Cruz a lot of delegates. As a result Cruz needs to not only beat Trump by large margins from now till March 15th but also to win most of the big ones in the North ( Ohio, Pennsylvania, N.Y) and California, which are more Trump and Kasich territory. Also lets not discount Trump's weakness from now on.
Long story short, Trump is doing a bad enough finish that he might fall short of victory and Cruz might had a bad enough start to also fall short of victory.
Perhaps we should be looking at past precedents. How many of the eventual winners of the leadership election were frontrunners a year, or two years, before the election? And how well did the hot favourites that far out do in the actual leadership election?
Senor Jessop, I trust your health is restored? Do hope so. Nice to see you. x
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
I'm still doubtful about a brokered convention. Trump v Cruz may look like Alien v Predator, but they have at least put themselves forward for scrutiny by the voters. If they were horribly split between three or more candidates, then maybe, but this is a two horse race going into the big winner takes all states.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
I rate a convention much higher than 5% (I give it at the moment 33%) simply because Trump's early strength denied Cruz a lot of delegates. As a result Cruz needs to not only beat Trump by large margins from now till March 15th but also to win most of the big ones in the North ( Ohio, Pennsylvania, N.Y) and California, which are more Trump and Kasich territory. Also lets not discount Trump's weakness from now on.
Long story short, Trump is doing a bad enough finish that he might fall short of victory and Cruz might had a bad enough start to also fall short of victory.
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
totally agree a pygmy. She will be off for a safe Westminster seat in near future.
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
Not so. Her popularity among those that will never vote Tory is irrelevant. For that matter, her rating with those who always vote Tory isn't that important. What matters is how she's she's seen by those who might or might not vote SCon.
She has a slim chance of a losers seat on the list , that is how good she is. If she was any good at all she would not have had to dump a colleague in Edinburgh to try and improve her chances of a losers list seat.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
I'm still doubtful about a brokered convention. Trump v Cruz may look like Alien v Predator, but they have at least put themselves forward for scrutiny by the voters. If they were horribly split between three or more candidates, then maybe, but this is a two horse race going into the big winner takes all states.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
I rate a convention much higher than 5% (I give it at the moment 33%) simply because Trump's early strength denied Cruz a lot of delegates. As a result Cruz needs to not only beat Trump by large margins from now till March 15th but also to win most of the big ones in the North ( Ohio, Pennsylvania, N.Y) and California, which are more Trump and Kasich territory. Also lets not discount Trump's weakness from now on.
Long story short, Trump is doing a bad enough finish that he might fall short of victory and Cruz might had a bad enough start to also fall short of victory.
I was meaning in respect of calculating the odds of a brokered convention?
Let me put the question a different way - how many delegates do you see going to anyone other than Cruz or Trump from now on?
I'm afraid I can't respond now - got to go out - but brokered conventions are discussed far more frequently than they occur and I suspect that affects how people view the likeliness of that outcome.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
You seriously think that the field beyond Trump and Cruz has a one-in-three chance? It's a view, I suppose.
Trump may have taken a knock after the debate. We have no evidence as to whether this is a sustained hit. For one thing, the spotlight will now turn back very sharply to Cruz, who has more than a few questions of his own to answer on both policy and eligibility. I also doubt the notion that he can become an 'anti-Trump' bucket for the simple reason that he has far too many negatives of his own. People won't switch from, say, Kasich to him in order to stop Trump if they view Cruz as even worse.
But it will almost certainly be one or the other. Even if it goes to the convention, why on earth would either man direct his delegates to support a third candidate?
The delegates are bound to the candidates only in the first ballot. That's the key for the establishment to rig the result, they can install their people as delegates so on the second ballot they will vote for whoever the establishment has picked for them.
If it goes to a convention the chances of both Cruz and Trump to win it are very low, more likely it will be a person X that the establishment picks.
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich. It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
You seriously think that the field beyond Trump and Cruz has a one-in-three chance? It's a view, I suppose.
Trump may have taken a knock after the debate. We have no evidence as to whether this is a sustained hit. For one thing, the spotlight will now turn back very sharply to Cruz, who has more than a few questions of his own to answer on both policy and eligibility. I also doubt the notion that he can become an 'anti-Trump' bucket for the simple reason that he has far too many negatives of his own. People won't switch from, say, Kasich to him in order to stop Trump if they view Cruz as even worse.
But it will almost certainly be one or the other. Even if it goes to the convention, why on earth would either man direct his delegates to support a third candidate?
The delegates are bound to the candidates only in the first ballot. That's the key for the establishment to rig the result, they can install their people as delegates so on the second ballot they will vote for whoever the establishment has picked for them.
If it goes to a convention the chances of both Cruz and Trump to win it are very low, more likely it will be a person X that the establishment picks.
Romney ? Easier to argue for than Jeb Bush, I guess.
Perhaps we should be looking at past precedents. How many of the eventual winners of the leadership election were frontrunners a year, or two years, before the election? And how well did the hot favourites that far out do in the actual leadership election?
Senor Jessop, I trust your health is restored? Do hope so. Nice to see you. x
Mostly, thanks. I still get the most head-crunchingly blinding headaches, and have some minor (though annoying) short-term memory issues.
Annoyingly, if this week's efforts are anything to go by, if the latter does not improve it may cause a change in career when I go back to work ...
Given last nights results, where it was clear that Trump and especially Rubio tanked in favour of Cruz turning 20 point Trump leads to very close results and very close results into massive Cruz victories, i'm looking at the schedule.
I'm still doubtful about a brokered convention. Trump v Cruz may look like Alien v Predator, but they have at least put themselves forward for scrutiny by the voters. If they were horribly split between three or more candidates, then maybe, but this is a two horse race going into the big winner takes all states.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
I rate a convention much higher than 5% (I give it at the moment 33%) simply because Trump's early strength denied Cruz a lot of delegates. As a result Cruz needs to not only beat Trump by large margins from now till March 15th but also to win most of the big ones in the North ( Ohio, Pennsylvania, N.Y) and California, which are more Trump and Kasich territory. Also lets not discount Trump's weakness from now on.
Long story short, Trump is doing a bad enough finish that he might fall short of victory and Cruz might had a bad enough start to also fall short of victory.
I was meaning in respect of calculating the odds of a brokered convention?
Let me put the question a different way - how many delegates do you see going to anyone other than Cruz or Trump from now on?
I'm afraid I can't respond now - got to go out - but brokered conventions are discussed far more frequently than they occur and I suspect that affects how people view the likeliness of that outcome.
Delegates other than Trump and Cruz?
Lets see, Kasich can get around 238. Rubio around 52, and I'm not counting Utah.
Also not all states are winner take all on March 15th and afterwards.
Tennessee is a good comparison with Kentucky. In a closed caucus Trump got 35.9% compared to Tennessee at 38.9% which was an open primary.
Louisiana in a closed primary Trump got 40.4% of the on the day vote, the earlier voters did win it for him there (46.7%) but no evidence of a collapse.
I am afraid I don't see the vote collapse, perhaps a slight dip when he should probably got a bit of a bump after Super Tuesday. Really Maine is more the fault of Trump's resistance to putting a bit more money and organisation into it, caucuses are not Trump's strength.
Really last night was about the collapse of the Rubio vote, bodes very well for Trump in Florida which I think we can consider done especially as about a quarter of the vote has already been done.
Kasich wants to be VP, if it happens it will be as Trump's, and I think he would be a good pick so I give that a strong chance.
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
Quite. REMAIN is very likely to win. So in that situation it has to be a healing candidate, a mild LEAVER. So the passionate losers don't go mad. Think of the Tory party as Scotland post indyref.
the very worst candidate in that emotional turmoil is a europhile, especially if they are seen as a betrayer - Hammond, May, Javid - or as an actual back stabber: Osborne. "Do you want a career or are you voting LEAVE".
I can't argue with any of that, but WHOM might it be?
"Why you shouldn’t assume a Brexiter will be Cameron’s successor"
Why would you? Brexit means many things to many people. The really tough part is working out to what extent we leave Europe. It seems unlikely that anyone will have sufficiently nailed that vision to find a way through the minefield.
I still don't know which way I'll vote. The Leave campaign makes a compelling argument to stay, but the Remain advocates convince me with their every word that we should leave.
SeanT: Gove has a chance in all this to rise. Lesser figures too - Priti Patel, and Rees-Mogg.
I had previously thought that the worst possible result was a narrow Remain, as it was likely to see the Conservative Party tear itself apart.
I now think the worst is probably a narrow Leave, because at least one group of the Leavers is going to feel royally buggered.
There are those on the Leave side - like myself - who see EFTA/EEA as much more attractive place to be than where we are now. In the single market, but with a much lower bill, and with less ECJ interference. What's not to like?
But there's another group of Leavers who want a very different outcome. Their primary motivation is the reduction of immigration into the UK. And who see - in the words of one poster on here - EFTA/EEA as a 'betrayal'.
If we go for EFTA/EEA, it will be seen as yet another betrayal of the people by the elites. If we do not, then there will be a lot of resentment by those who saw Brexit as merely meaning a reduction in external interference.
Speedy - I must take you up on this point, you said
"Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment"
There have been 2 new Michigan polls today (NBC/Wall Street Journal & CBS/YouGov) which have Trump leads of 15% and 19%. At the moment the ARG poll that gave Kaisch a 2% lead yesterday is looking like a real rogue.
There are 5 major primaries over the next 10 days. - Michigan, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and NC. If Trump wins 3 or more then to all extents and purposes he's home and dry.
Perhaps we should be looking at past precedents. How many of the eventual winners of the leadership election were frontrunners a year, or two years, before the election? And how well did the hot favourites that far out do in the actual leadership election?
Senor Jessop, I trust your health is restored? Do hope so. Nice to see you. x
Mostly, thanks. I still get the most head-crunchingly blinding headaches, and have some minor (though annoying) short-term memory issues.
Annoyingly, if this week's efforts are anything to go by, if the latter does not improve it may cause a change in career when I go back to work ...
Sorry to hear that JJ. If a change of career proves necessary, hopefully this need not also involve a change of home, etc. Checking back, you appear to have been absent from PB for approx 3 weeks, so still early days in terms of your path towards hopefully a full recovery.
If we go for EFTA/EEA, it will be seen as yet another betrayal of the people by the elites. If we do not, then there will be a lot of resentment by those who saw Brexit as merely meaning a reduction in external interference.
Fundamentally many Leavers see Brexit as a way of reducing the influence of people who disagree with them, without considering whether their views really command majority support within the UK.
If we go for EFTA/EEA, it will be seen as yet another betrayal of the people by the elites. If we do not, then there will be a lot of resentment by those who saw Brexit as merely meaning a reduction in external interference.
I must admit, I'd prefer to get out fully to take control of immigration, but I would settle for EFTA/EEA. I suspect you're right that the more vociferous advocates of leaving the whole lot would be very upset if we didn't. My advice to them is keep campaigning and wait for the 2020 election. I maintain that if immigration carries on at the current levels until the next election then the Tories will have a big problem.
@LondonbobReally last night was about the collapse of the Rubio vote
Yes, I think this is the case. He's picked a shocking time to get the flu.
It may sound obvious, but one would have thought that a budding POTUS candidate, undertaking a gruelling and ultra-demanding schehule over the winter months would have taken the sensible precaution of having a flu jab. Although very seldom life threatening, flu can be very debilitating and can take a considerable time from which to recover. I make a point of having my jab every October - my local pharmacy does it in about 2 minutes flat.
If we go for EFTA/EEA, it will be seen as yet another betrayal of the people by the elites. If we do not, then there will be a lot of resentment by those who saw Brexit as merely meaning a reduction in external interference.
Fundamentally many Leavers see Brexit as a way of reducing the influence of people who disagree with them, without considering whether their views really command majority support within the UK.
WG, sorry, but this is nonsense. If you're asked a question yay or nay, then I think you can answer it. Nearly everyone will answer the question based on its merits.
Perhaps we should be looking at past precedents. How many of the eventual winners of the leadership election were frontrunners a year, or two years, before the election? And how well did the hot favourites that far out do in the actual leadership election?
Senor Jessop, I trust your health is restored? Do hope so. Nice to see you. x
Mostly, thanks. I still get the most head-crunchingly blinding headaches, and have some minor (though annoying) short-term memory issues.
Annoyingly, if this week's efforts are anything to go by, if the latter does not improve it may cause a change in career when I go back to work ...
Mr J, that's obviously very alarming. Have you had a scan? Wish you well. Don't go back to work until you're sure.
There are two kinds of political campaign. There are successful campaigns and then there are campaigns that spend their time moaning about the other side’s campaign. When you hear the toddler’s whinge “that’s not fair” in the political playground it is a reliable indicator that someone is worried that they are losing the argument.
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
Quite. REMAIN is very likely to win. So in that situation it has to be a healing candidate, a mild LEAVER. So the passionate losers don't go mad. Think of the Tory party as Scotland post indyref.
the very worst candidate in that emotional turmoil is a europhile, especially if they are seen as a betrayer - Hammond, May, Javid - or as an actual back stabber: Osborne. "Do you want a career or are you voting LEAVE".
I can't argue with any of that, but WHOM might it be?
Boris or Gove.
I had discounted Gove's chances (partly because he discounts them himself). But he's smart, likeable, Scottish (interesting), adopted, non posh, articulate. He's been successfully caricatured by the left as some awful Nazi, quite absurdly, but then Thatcher was successfully caricatured as the milk snatcher, and went on to be the greatest British prime minister of the 20th century.
Gove would beat Corbyn very easily.
Hmm.
Yep - I'd vote for Gove, like several other on here have said. First though, I'd like to see him in a higher profile job ...... say with him moving to the Treasury asap, where Osborne appears to have seriously lost his way and certainly with it my support. We need someone with some very serious intellect to take on the top job.
@LondonbobReally last night was about the collapse of the Rubio vote
Yes, I think this is the case. He's picked a shocking time to get the flu.
It may sound obvious, but one would have thought that a budding POTUS candidate, undertaking a gruelling and ultra-demanding schehule over the winter months would have taken the sensible precaution of having a flu jab. Although very seldom life threatening, flu can be very debilitating and can take a considerable time from which to recover. I make a point of having my jab every October - my local pharmacy does it in about 2 minutes flat.
The jabs are aimed at particular strains. Some years they get it right and prevent a lot of flu. Other years they are not so much use. Cetsinly even in best years they can't stop all flu.
If we go for EFTA/EEA, it will be seen as yet another betrayal of the people by the elites. If we do not, then there will be a lot of resentment by those who saw Brexit as merely meaning a reduction in external interference.
Fundamentally many Leavers see Brexit as a way of reducing the influence of people who disagree with them, without considering whether their views really command majority support within the UK.
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
Quite. REMAIN is very likely to win. So in that situation it has to be a healing candidate, a mild LEAVER. So the passionate losers don't go mad. Think of the Tory party as Scotland post indyref.
the very worst candidate in that emotional turmoil is a europhile, especially if they are seen as a betrayer - Hammond, May, Javid - or as an actual back stabber: Osborne. "Do you want a career or are you voting LEAVE".
I can't argue with any of that, but WHOM might it be?
Theresa May. Boris is the new Judas. Loyalists won't even look at him and Gove is so unpopular in the country that Cameron couldn't even let him keep his job at education.
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
Not so. Her popularity among those that will never vote Tory is irrelevant. For that matter, her rating with those who always vote Tory isn't that important. What matters is how she's she's seen by those who might or might not vote SCon.
She has a slim chance of a losers seat on the list , that is how good she is. If she was any good at all she would not have had to dump a colleague in Edinburgh to try and improve her chances of a losers list seat.
"a slim chance of a losers seat"
Don't suppose you'd give me 2/1 on her being elected that way? (2/1 being a good deal more likely than 'a slim chance'?
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
Quite. REMAIN is very likely to win. So in that situation it has to be a healing candidate, a mild LEAVER. So the passionate losers don't go mad. Think of the Tory party as Scotland post indyref.
the very worst candidate in that emotional turmoil is a europhile, especially if they are seen as a betrayer - Hammond, May, Javid - or as an actual back stabber: Osborne. "Do you want a career or are you voting LEAVE".
I can't argue with any of that, but WHOM might it be?
Theresa May. Boris is the new Judas. Loyalists won't even look at him and Gove is so unpopular in the country that Cameron couldn't even let him keep his job at education.
There will be a Remain candidate v a Leave candidate sent to the membership, May therefore needs to overtake Osborne as the Remain candidate
Speedy - I must take you up on this point, you said
"Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment"
There have been 2 new Michigan polls today (NBC/Wall Street Journal & CBS/YouGov) which have Trump leads of 15% and 19%. At the moment the ARG poll that gave Kaisch a 2% lead yesterday is looking like a real rogue.
There are 5 major primaries over the next 10 days. - Michigan, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and NC. If Trump wins 3 or more then to all extents and purposes he's home and dry.
Speedy - I must take you up on this point, you said
"Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment"
There have been 2 new Michigan polls today (NBC/Wall Street Journal & CBS/YouGov) which have Trump leads of 15% and 19%. At the moment the ARG poll that gave Kaisch a 2% lead yesterday is looking like a real rogue.
There are 5 major primaries over the next 10 days. - Michigan, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and NC. If Trump wins 3 or more then to all extents and purposes he's home and dry.
This really should be the settled and coherent view of all the LEAVE campaigns. "We disagree on free movement, and on many other things. But if you vote for us, YOU, the British electorate, will be able to determine your immigration policy democratically.
Except that's not true. Promoting such deceit reveals the paucity of the leave campaign's intellectual foundation.
Assuming leave win the referendum, Article 50 will be triggered, and by the time of the next election the deal will be done.
That deal will be negotiated by Cameron's successor, and if he (or she) negotiates free movement in exchange for trade, which is the most likely outcome, then there is no vote at the next election that can prevent that (Labour would resign Lisbon given the chance)
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
Quite. REMAIN is very likely to win. So in that situation it has to be a healing candidate, a mild LEAVER. So the passionate losers don't go mad. Think of the Tory party as Scotland post indyref.
the very worst candidate in that emotional turmoil is a europhile, especially if they are seen as a betrayer - Hammond, May, Javid - or as an actual back stabber: Osborne. "Do you want a career or are you voting LEAVE".
I can't argue with any of that, but WHOM might it be?
Boris or Gove.
I had discounted Gove's chances (partly because he discounts them himself). But he's smart, likeable, Scottish (interesting), adopted, non posh, articulate. He's been successfully caricatured by the left as some awful Nazi, quite absurdly, but then Thatcher was successfully caricatured as the milk snatcher, and went on to be the greatest British prime minister of the 20th century.
Gove would beat Corbyn very easily.
Hmm.
Yep - I'd vote for Gove, like several other on here have said. First though, I'd like to see him in a higher profile job ...... say with him moving to the Treasury asap, where Osborne appears to have seriously lost his way and certainly with it my support. We need someone with some very serious intellect to take on the top job.
Osborne has not lost his way. So I must question your analysis. The country faces a big problem with inheriting a deficit of some 160bn. Any chancellor faces the same difficulties. He may well move but for entirely different reasons. A future pm would find the FO a useful destination
Mr Eagles. I have to say, my reaction to the polling re the first four priorities is a big "Well, duh!" In a party for adults, those four priorities should absolutely be the ones applied to qualification for leadership of a party of government. Indeed, they are motherhood principles.
What strikes me more is that continuing Cameron's policies and having someone who was a Brexiter are level pegging. That shows how the party is very evenly split (although some Brexiters might also want to continue Cameron's policies broadly as focused on the domestic and non-EU agenda).
This really should be the settled and coherent view of all the LEAVE campaigns. "We disagree on free movement, and on many other things. But if you vote for us, YOU, the British electorate, will be able to determine your immigration policy democratically.
Except that's not true. Promoting such deceit reveals the paucity of the leave campaign's intellectual foundation.
Assuming leave win the referendum, Article 50 will be triggered, and by the time of the next election the deal will be done.
That deal will be negotiated by Cameron's successor, and if he (or she) negotiates free movement in exchange for trade, which is the most likely outcome, then there is no vote at the next election that can prevent that (Labour would resign Lisbon given the chance)
That just goes to show how dishonest it is for Remainians to ask Leavers what deal outside the EU they want...
This really should be the settled and coherent view of all the LEAVE campaigns. "We disagree on free movement, and on many other things. But if you vote for us, YOU, the British electorate, will be able to determine your immigration policy democratically.
Except that's not true. Promoting such deceit reveals the paucity of the leave campaign's intellectual foundation.
Assuming leave win the referendum, Article 50 will be triggered, and by the time of the next election the deal will be done.
That deal will be negotiated by Cameron's successor, and if he (or she) negotiates free movement in exchange for trade, which is the most likely outcome, then there is no vote at the next election that can prevent that (Labour would resign Lisbon given the chance)
So it is not only Brexiters who are deceitful. Remember, deals will take up to ten years to sign. Which is it, Article 50 triggered and fully negotiated in 2+ years, or ten years? I am getting confused.
Tosh too as the negotiated terms will be put to parliament for a vote, presumably, and there is nothing to stop there being a snap election to give a full mandate to those terms.
This debate is getting very frustrating as both sides seem to be deliberately talking past each other. The personal attacks on the other side's intelligence also do not help.
That said, I see the Remainers consistently refusing to accept that there is a possibility of creating innovative new solutions to our future relationship with the EU and the rest of the world. That is what I find most depressing - a lack of confidence, creative thought and ambition. Is that what the UK has become - a child curled up in a foetal position looking for an adult to take care of it so that it does not have to think for itself?
From the table above, "someone who can unite the Conservative party behind them", the third most important attribute, is likely to be a Leaver, given that the balance of the party and all the most obsessed are on that side of the fence.
Quite. REMAIN is very likely to win. So in that situation it has to be a healing candidate, a mild LEAVER. So the passionate losers don't go mad. Think of the Tory party as Scotland post indyref.
the very worst candidate in that emotional turmoil is a europhile, especially if they are seen as a betrayer - Hammond, May, Javid - or as an actual back stabber: Osborne. "Do you want a career or are you voting LEAVE".
I can't argue with any of that, but WHOM might it be?
Theresa May. Boris is the new Judas. Loyalists won't even look at him and Gove is so unpopular in the country that Cameron couldn't even let him keep his job at education.
When we look for insight into Tory politics the first thing we turn to is the Riviera Daily
I maintain that if immigration carries on at the current levels until the next election then the Tories will have a big problem.
The only reason I can think of why it won't will be a huge financial crisis, in which case they will also have big problems.
Do you mean a financial crisis will suppress immigration or do you mean it will distract attention from immigration at the election.
The former, although the later is probably true as well.
If the is a major financial crisis, a lot of jobs will go up in smoke, and a lot of EU nationals from other countries will wander off home to look for other opportunities. If the economy carries on toddling along I cannot see a single reason why immigration wont continue to climb for a long time yet indefinitely.
If immigration continues to climb, the government is in the sh*t, if there is a financial crisis the population will be too pissed off about the economy to notice reducing immigration (especially as the "foreigners taking our jobs" narrative will get new legs), and the government is in the sh*t.
Tosh too as the negotiated terms will be put to parliament for a vote
A vote in parliament does not give voters a choice.
There may be a snap election, but of the Tory leader has negotiated, and is therefore advocating free movement, the voters don't get a choice there either
This debate is getting very frustrating as both sides seem to be deliberately talking past each other. The personal attacks on the other side's intelligence also do not help.
As I have consistently said, I would like both sides to lose.
Both campaigns have been terrible, will be terrible, and may not actually have much impact on the final result
Speedy - I must take you up on this point, you said
"Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment"
There have been 2 new Michigan polls today (NBC/Wall Street Journal & CBS/YouGov) which have Trump leads of 15% and 19%. At the moment the ARG poll that gave Kaisch a 2% lead yesterday is looking like a real rogue.
There are 5 major primaries over the next 10 days. - Michigan, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and NC. If Trump wins 3 or more then to all extents and purposes he's home and dry.
Speedy - I must take you up on this point, you said
"Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment"
There have been 2 new Michigan polls today (NBC/Wall Street Journal & CBS/YouGov) which have Trump leads of 15% and 19%. At the moment the ARG poll that gave Kaisch a 2% lead yesterday is looking like a real rogue.
There are 5 major primaries over the next 10 days. - Michigan, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and NC. If Trump wins 3 or more then to all extents and purposes he's home and dry.
@RandPaul 23m23 minutes ago Nancy Reagan was an exemplary First Lady and woman. She will be missed. My thoughts and prayers are with her loved ones. RIP Mrs. Reagan
@Schwarzenegger 25m25 minutes ago Nancy Reagan was one of my heroes. She served as First Lady with unbelievable power, class and grace and left her mark on the world. (1/2)
Arnold @Schwarzenegger 24m24 minutes ago She's with her Ronnie now, but those of us she left behind will miss her dearly.
Tosh too as the negotiated terms will be put to parliament for a vote
A vote in parliament does not give voters a choice.
There may be a snap election, but of the Tory leader has negotiated, and is therefore advocating free movement, the voters don't get a choice there either
Except Cameron's majority isn't that big, Labour certainly wont help him with his little local difficulty, and lots of Tory MPs will be looking over their shoulder at their electorate... and their constituency association.. could all get a bit squeaky bum.
@tedcruz 3m3 minutes ago Nancy Reagan will be remembered for her deep passion for this nation and love for her husband, Ronald. The Reagan family is in our prayers.
Comments
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/6837512/Brave-journalist-spends-a-week-in-toughest-prison-in-the-world.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRDsXPjg8XU&feature=youtu.be
It's no coincidence that Andrew Neil struggles to get government ministers on his programmes and I don't believe it's because he is that good. The constant bombardment of "statistics" (his props) is another turn-off for me. The BBC should bring back his programme "Hard Talk" where he interviewed politicians on a one-to-one basis for (I think it was an hour). Even today, it's much more interesting listening to the older politicians like Heseltine, Lamont, Howard, they developed their skills in what seems like another age. Unlike the "soundbite" politcians of today.
I'm having a rant today but I know nothing is going to change!
Today is Puerto Rico, logically a Rubio win.
On Tuesday there are:
Hawaii which is too far to matter, anyone could win it.
Idaho,Trump was leading in the polls before the debate but not by much so it's a probable Cruz win
Mississippi, Trump had a bigger pre-debate lead than in Louisiana and the results on the Louisiana-Mississippi border are in favour of Trump by a few points, so it's a lean Trump.
Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment.
So overall Tuesday looks like another bad day for Trump, most importantly he is on course to lose Michigan to Kasich.
It's amazing what one bad debate can do, Trump will have a big difficulty winning states from now on with only a third of the vote in a 2 or even a 3 person race.
Given the above I have to downgrade Trump's chances for the nomination again, after S.Tuesday I downgraded them to 50% and I moved Cruz up to 25, now I give it Trump 33, Cruz 33, Convention (Person X) 33%.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/271926-tony-blair-europeans-have-anxiety-about-us-presidential-race
When a politician puts his or her NAME on the ballot paper they have to carry a certain degree of popularity. When Salmond did it in 2007 and 2011 he had a positive rating of plus 30 and then plus 40. Sturgeon is currently plus 35.
Davidson is currently MINUS 6. Therefore his is not just inadvisable it is ludicrous. If Brewer was a half decent interviewer he would have exposed it as say an Andrew Neil would have done. She is completely and totally over rated and heading for a well merited fall.
A humble reminder that under a Morris Dancer Government, we would've invaded France by now.
The only way I see a brokered convention is if there is a material issue that comes out the woodwork on the person getting most delegates. Which, with these two, shouldn't be entirely ruled out. I'd still rank them Trump 60%, Cruz 35%, brokered convention 5%.
Many of the pharmacies were in the Edgware Road area, catering to a largely Arabic client base.
And a reputable pharmacist from the area, speaking to the BBC on condition of anonymity, said it was common knowledge that unlawful sales to foreign visitors continue to this day.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35720655
2/1 GOP nominee is neither Cruz or Trump.
For outsiders like me, I feel guilty not paying for this entertainment.
As a result Cruz needs to not only beat Trump by large margins from now till March 15th but also to win most of the big ones in the North ( Ohio, Pennsylvania, N.Y) and California, which are more Trump and Kasich territory.
Also lets not discount Trump's weakness from now on.
Long story short, Trump is doing a bad enough finish that he might fall short of victory and Cruz might had a bad enough start to also fall short of victory.
Trump may have taken a knock after the debate. We have no evidence as to whether this is a sustained hit. For one thing, the spotlight will now turn back very sharply to Cruz, who has more than a few questions of his own to answer on both policy and eligibility. I also doubt the notion that he can become an 'anti-Trump' bucket for the simple reason that he has far too many negatives of his own. People won't switch from, say, Kasich to him in order to stop Trump if they view Cruz as even worse.
But it will almost certainly be one or the other. Even if it goes to the convention, why on earth would either man direct his delegates to support a third candidate?
Here try it yourself.
Let me put the question a different way - how many delegates do you see going to anyone other than Cruz or Trump from now on?
I'm afraid I can't respond now - got to go out - but brokered conventions are discussed far more frequently than they occur and I suspect that affects how people view the likeliness of that outcome.
That's the key for the establishment to rig the result, they can install their people as delegates so on the second ballot they will vote for whoever the establishment has picked for them.
If it goes to a convention the chances of both Cruz and Trump to win it are very low, more likely it will be a person X that the establishment picks.
Annoyingly, if this week's efforts are anything to go by, if the latter does not improve it may cause a change in career when I go back to work ...
BREAKING The Liberals have registered "Willie Rennie For Fourth Place" with the Electoral Commission. Also "Willie Rennie For Fifth Place".
hat tip d halliday
You have been warned.
Lets see, Kasich can get around 238.
Rubio around 52, and I'm not counting Utah.
Also not all states are winner take all on March 15th and afterwards.
Louisiana in a closed primary Trump got 40.4% of the on the day vote, the earlier voters did win it for him there (46.7%) but no evidence of a collapse.
I am afraid I don't see the vote collapse, perhaps a slight dip when he should probably got a bit of a bump after Super Tuesday. Really Maine is more the fault of Trump's resistance to putting a bit more money and organisation into it, caucuses are not Trump's strength.
Really last night was about the collapse of the Rubio vote, bodes very well for Trump in Florida which I think we can consider done especially as about a quarter of the vote has already been done.
Kasich wants to be VP, if it happens it will be as Trump's, and I think he would be a good pick so I give that a strong chance.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429877/trump-kasich-2016
Yes, I think this is the case. He's picked a shocking time to get the flu.
Why would you? Brexit means many things to many people. The really tough part is working out to what extent we leave Europe. It seems unlikely that anyone will have sufficiently nailed that vision to find a way through the minefield.
I still don't know which way I'll vote. The Leave campaign makes a compelling argument to stay, but the Remain advocates convince me with their every word that we should leave.
SeanT: Gove has a chance in all this to rise. Lesser figures too - Priti Patel, and Rees-Mogg.
I had previously thought that the worst possible result was a narrow Remain, as it was likely to see the Conservative Party tear itself apart.
I now think the worst is probably a narrow Leave, because at least one group of the Leavers is going to feel royally buggered.
There are those on the Leave side - like myself - who see EFTA/EEA as much more attractive place to be than where we are now. In the single market, but with a much lower bill, and with less ECJ interference. What's not to like?
But there's another group of Leavers who want a very different outcome. Their primary motivation is the reduction of immigration into the UK. And who see - in the words of one poster on here - EFTA/EEA as a 'betrayal'.
If we go for EFTA/EEA, it will be seen as yet another betrayal of the people by the elites. If we do not, then there will be a lot of resentment by those who saw Brexit as merely meaning a reduction in external interference.
"Michigan, the first post debate poll shows Trump's 20 point pre-debate lead going poof like the election results suggested, with Kasich in the lead there it will be challenging for Trump to win it, it's a probable Kasich win at the moment"
There have been 2 new Michigan polls today (NBC/Wall Street Journal & CBS/YouGov) which have Trump leads of 15% and 19%. At the moment the ARG poll that gave Kaisch a 2% lead yesterday is looking like a real rogue.
There are 5 major primaries over the next 10 days. - Michigan, Florida, Illinois, Ohio and NC. If Trump wins 3 or more then to all extents and purposes he's home and dry.
Although very seldom life threatening, flu can be very debilitating and can take a considerable time from which to recover. I make a point of having my jab every October - my local pharmacy does it in about 2 minutes flat.
I wonder if there was intentional irony behind this comment by Penny Mordaunt, headlined in today's "Telegraph".
Wish you well. Don't go back to work until you're sure.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/06/eu-referendum-out-campaign-whingeing-
Don't suppose you'd give me 2/1 on her being elected that way? (2/1 being a good deal more likely than 'a slim chance'?
NBC/WSJ
GOP
Trump 41
Cruz 22
Rubio 17
Kasich 13
Dems
Clinton 57
Sanders 40
General Election
Clinton 52
Trump 36
Clinton 48
Cruz 41
Sanders 56
Trump 34
Sanders 54
Cruz 36
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-hold-big-leads-michigan-poll-n532576
CBS/Yougov
GOP
Trump 39
Cruz 24
Rubio 16
Kasich 13
Dems
Clinton 55
Sanders 44
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-lead-in-michigan/
Only ARG was conducted after the debate.
Assuming leave win the referendum, Article 50 will be triggered, and by the time of the next election the deal will be done.
That deal will be negotiated by Cameron's successor, and if he (or she) negotiates free movement in exchange for trade, which is the most likely outcome, then there is no vote at the next election that can prevent that (Labour would resign Lisbon given the chance)
Nancy Reagan has died.
https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/706522015541415937
At least she wont be able to make a statement condemning Trump.
But prepare for a wave of Reagan nostalgia in the GOP.
He may well move but for entirely different reasons. A future pm would find the FO a useful destination
What strikes me more is that continuing Cameron's policies and having someone who was a Brexiter are level pegging. That shows how the party is very evenly split (although some Brexiters might also want to continue Cameron's policies broadly as focused on the domestic and non-EU agenda).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35739997
Tosh too as the negotiated terms will be put to parliament for a vote, presumably, and there is nothing to stop there being a snap election to give a full mandate to those terms.
This debate is getting very frustrating as both sides seem to be deliberately talking past each other. The personal attacks on the other side's intelligence also do not help.
That said, I see the Remainers consistently refusing to accept that there is a possibility of creating innovative new solutions to our future relationship with the EU and the rest of the world. That is what I find most depressing - a lack of confidence, creative thought and ambition. Is that what the UK has become - a child curled up in a foetal position looking for an adult to take care of it so that it does not have to think for itself?
If the is a major financial crisis, a lot of jobs will go up in smoke, and a lot of EU nationals from other countries will wander off home to look for other opportunities. If the economy carries on toddling along I cannot see a single reason why immigration wont continue to climb for a long time yet indefinitely.
If immigration continues to climb, the government is in the sh*t, if there is a financial crisis the population will be too pissed off about the economy to notice reducing immigration (especially as the "foreigners taking our jobs" narrative will get new legs), and the government is in the sh*t.
There may be a snap election, but of the Tory leader has negotiated, and is therefore advocating free movement, the voters don't get a choice there either
http://newyorkcityguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Reagan-Trump-550x459.jpg
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/lt/lt_cache/thumbnail/715/img/photos/2015/07/17/2e/9b/kasich-with-reagan.3.jpg
Both campaigns have been terrible, will be terrible, and may not actually have much impact on the final result
With the passing of Nancy Reagan, God and Ronnie have finally welcomed a choice soul home. https://www.facebook.com/mittromney/posts/10153339520811121 …
Nancy Reagan was an exemplary First Lady and woman. She will be missed. My thoughts and prayers are with her loved ones. RIP Mrs. Reagan
Nancy Reagan was one of my heroes. She served as First Lady with unbelievable power, class and grace and left her mark on the world. (1/2)
Arnold @Schwarzenegger 24m24 minutes ago
She's with her Ronnie now, but those of us she left behind will miss her dearly.
BritishScottish tennis player is in big big trouble.Nancy Reagan will be remembered for her deep passion for this nation and love for her husband, Ronald. The Reagan family is in our prayers.