State polls are rarely consistent across pollsters but this year they do seem to be all over the place. I guess that, on the GOP side in particular, there is a lot of switching going on. The Trump vote is often reasonably close it's the others that are jumping about all over the place.
Any thoughts on why the Michigan polling on the Democrat side was so off beam?. I have read a number of explanations but none I find particularly convincing.
State polls vary greatly partly because of the huge variation in the competence of the pollster. A touchy subject with OGH but frankly some of the US pollsters are about as much use as a diet sheet at a Nicholas Soames dinner party.
In 08 and 12 I issued health warnings on a vast number of polls I posted on PB usually because the demographic makeup was badly wrong, and the sample size was two men and a dog. Some pollsters also have a lean verging on the horizontal.
I also haven't found a convincing reason for the Michigan polling hash up but there are times when the punters muddy the waters to keep us all honest, and quite right too.
To be fair I'm not blaming you for anything, just pointing out that continually making things up makes you look desperate.
I can't abide Galloway but I'm keen to hear why he wants to leave. Aren't you?
No I'm not. If I'd wanted to hear what such a meaningless bigoted, unpatriotic, racist hatemonger wanted to say I'd turn up to listen to him.
To exclude every mainstream Labour Leave person altogether and include some nobody with a giant ego like this is just ludicrous.
But mainstream Labour Leave is a contradiction in terms. No Leave people are anywhere near mainstream Labour. Hoey is seen as a maverick - hunt supporter, worked for Boris, publicly critical of her local [Labour] Council etc etc. Her speaking style is didactic and unpersuasive.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
Actually been doing a spot of work, so only paying half-attention. What's this BBC panel business?
Somebody has leaked to Staines the opening offer by the BBC in what they think the big wembley debate should be like. Staines is suggesting they have done so, because they don't think the parties will accept, but want to be a pain in the ass after being shafted during the GE campaign.
Guido appears to have doubts: UPDATE: A BBC source gets in touch to kick back: “This is total, 100% nonsense, including the format and the names”. Curiously the Telegraph has the very same names. Though this is a strong denial from the Beeb and an all-male Leave line-up would be very unlike Auntie…
Mr. Urquhart, could be wrong but I believe Mallya sold his share in Force India (there was talk of an Aston Martin takeover, though that hasn't happened yet).
@rcs1000 re Fleet Street: I don't have as high an opinion on Goldman as you clearly do!
@cyclefree i'd far rather there was transparent charging for services provided and then we can get away from stuffing savers on the interest spread and people who do selling things on ancillary fees and penalties that are way divorced from the real cost of their transgression
@taffys the niche fit "honest and competent bank" is already taken
I tend to agree but a very very difficult sell for banks at the moment. They have to regain the trust they've pissed away first. That will take some time.
Is the "honest and competent" bank looking for worthy and honest customers, perchance?
The honest and competent bank always likes to meet interesting, worthy and honest people. Alignment of values and cultural fit in the most important factor in whether they want to develop a relationship thereafter.
Thank you. An offline conversation is needed, I think.
I quite agree but the sensible-wing of LEAVE aren't just going to be able to lock the Kippers etc in a cupboard till June!
Farage at least is leader of a real party that has an MP (even if he doesn't agree with Farage) and millions of voters. Galloway's so-called party didn't even register ten thousand votes at the election.
As I said you have nobody but Farage to blame for Galloway's meteoric rise to the heady heights of the LEAVE campaign.
The ownership has transferred to Diageo (the drinks company). He maintains the façade of ownership but he is basically done. Dodgy guy in general though.
Mr. Urquhart, could be wrong but I believe Mallya sold his share in Force India (there was talk of an Aston Martin takeover, though that hasn't happened yet).
According to this article from Feb, they are still trying to sell...their reasons,
"as part of efforts to raise cash and free jailed founder Subrata Roy."
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
The ownership has transferred to Diageo (the drinks company). He maintains the façade of ownership but he is basically done. Dodgy guy in general though.
Of United Breweries Group, but I thought the F1 team was separate? He has fingers in so many pies, hard to keep up....seems like me he has had trouble remembering what he owns and to keep paying people.
@OllyT The sole Minnesota poll was also way way way out. Notably it was an old one from January.
Ohio should shed light on the rust belt. If there's another polling failure for Hillary there, it spells trouble in the General in my view.
I'm completely unconvinced by 538's assessment that HRC has a 98% chance there.
I agree - I think she is probably home and dry in Florida and NC but Ohio and Illinois could be interesting given the polling shambles in Michigan. 538 seem to now be showing growing differences in their " polls only" and "polls plus" forecasts. Hedging their bests springs to mind
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
@OllyT The sole Minnesota poll was also way way way out. Notably it was an old one from January.
Ohio should shed light on the rust belt. If there's another polling failure for Hillary there, it spells trouble in the General in my view.
I'm completely unconvinced by 538's assessment that HRC has a 98% chance there.
I agree - I think she is probably home and dry in Florida and NC but Ohio and Illinois could be interesting given the polling shambles in Michigan. 538 seem to now be showing growing differences in their " polls only" and "polls plus" forecasts. Hedging their bests springs to mind
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Why are there no female proponents for Leave on that panel?
Andrea Leadsom, Priti Patel, Andrea Jenkyns, Sarah Wollaston, Kate Hooey or Gisela Stuart would be better than any of that lot.
I see what you mean, but I think it could be electric. Boris, George, Nigel, are all great speakers on their day, but all capable of utter disaster too. Total high stakes gamble.
The BBC has chosen well. The worst Leavers to choose IMHO.
On the other hand, Tim Farron and Caroline Lucas won't set the world on fire either.
Apart from Gove who would have a better claim to be speaking for the BREXITERS?
Delighted Alan Johnson is on the panel, the PB Tories will rubbish him but he has a lot of capital with centre left voters.
Priti Patel, Andrea Leadsom, Gove and Boris would be my panel of choice.
Isn't it indicate of LEAVE's problem that you guys are arguing about who represents you? I don't doubt an all Tory panel would be more unified but it isn't going to work like that. If I were a LEAVER my fear would be that Boris, Farage and Galloway end up contradicting each other because BREXIT means different things to each of them. On the other hand I expect that REMAIN team will put up a unified cross-party front
The polling figures below suggest you lot need to be worried. What was a foregone conclusion is going belly up.
More than 1/4 of Labour are for Leave btw, not what you told me the other day.
28% of Labour votes is not great for LEAVE and there is a long way to go yet. Whilst the Tories are fighting amongst themselves the other parties have scarcely begun campaigning yet - there are two and a half months to go.
I am still firmly of the opinion that REMAIN will win comfortably by the end of the day, if I am wrong I will enjoy the schadenfreude of watching the LEAVERS try to make good on the often contradictory promises they are making during the campaign.
But the ICM figures show that 34.5% of Labour voters expressing a preference currently intend to vote Leave! That is pretty high surely.
So looking back through the thread over the last few hours am I right in concluding that lots of people have got excited arguing about the merits or otherwise of a supposed line up for a debate which turns out to be completely bogus?
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
There isn't really a prominent Labour Remainer either. They are pretty much all keeping a low profile as far as the public can see. Possibly excepting Kinnock. Has he got his party back?
So looking back through the thread over the last few hours am I right in concluding that lots of people have got excited arguing about the merits or otherwise of a supposed line up for a debate which turns out to be completely bogus?
Yes. What's more, it was obvious from the start that it was bogus, given that the official campaigns haven't yet been chosen.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
O/T: Just a reminder that we have our first truly winner-take-all GOP contest today.
US Virgin Islands, all of 9 delegates...
Result about midnight, UK?
Is that right? I thought there were six pledged delegates up for grabs, plus three party officials (effectively superdelegates)?
GP implies they are all to be pledged now. http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/VI-R Only three places I can see remaining where the SDs may be unpledged. WY, Guam and American Samoa, although the bulk of PA's 'ordinary' delegates seem to be uncommitted/unpledged...
Yes, I read that too. It's a bit contradictory. It lists '9 pledged' at the top but then says "3 party leaders, the National Committeeman, the National Committeewoman, and the chairman of the Virgin Islands's Republican Party, will attend the convention by virtue of their position", which is presumably the '3 party' delegates in addition to the '6 base / at-large'. But if they're officials, how can they be pledged unless their election is a by-product of the convention (which is possible but would be an odd way of going about things)?
I don't suppose it will make any great difference.
GP also says:- "All 9 of Virgin Islands delegates to the National Convention delegates are elected in today's Presidential caucus."
However, we'll have to wait wait and see. It wouldn't surprise me if it changes.
State polls are rarely consistent across pollsters but this year they do seem to be all over the place. I guess that, on the GOP side in particular, there is a lot of switching going on. The Trump vote is often reasonably close it's the others that are jumping about all over the place.
Any thoughts on why the Michigan polling on the Democrat side was so off beam?. I have read a number of explanations but none I find particularly convincing.
State polls vary greatly partly because of the huge variation in the competence of the pollster. A touchy subject with OGH but frankly some of the US pollsters are about as much use as a diet sheet at a Nicholas Soames dinner party.
In 08 and 12 I issued health warnings on a vast number of polls I posted on PB usually because the demographic makeup was badly wrong, and the sample size was two men and a dog. Some pollsters also have a lean verging on the horizontal.
I also haven't found a convincing reason for the Michigan polling hash up but there are times when the punters muddy the waters to keep us all honest, and quite right too.
Agreed, would be very boring if all the polls were spot on!
O/T: Just a reminder that we have our first truly winner-take-all GOP contest today.
US Virgin Islands, all of 9 delegates...
Result about midnight, UK?
Is that right? I thought there were six pledged delegates up for grabs, plus three party officials (effectively superdelegates)?
GP implies they are all to be pledged now. http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/VI-R Only three places I can see remaining where the SDs may be unpledged. WY, Guam and American Samoa, although the bulk of PA's 'ordinary' delegates seem to be uncommitted/unpledged...
Yes, I read that too. It's a bit contradictory. It lists '9 pledged' at the top but then says "3 party leaders, the National Committeeman, the National Committeewoman, and the chairman of the Virgin Islands's Republican Party, will attend the convention by virtue of their position", which is presumably the '3 party' delegates in addition to the '6 base / at-large'. But if they're officials, how can they be pledged unless their election is a by-product of the convention (which is possible but would be an odd way of going about things)?
I don't suppose it will make any great difference.
GP also says:- "All 9 of Virgin Islands delegates to the National Convention delegates are elected in today's Presidential caucus."
However, we'll have to wait wait and see. It wouldn't surprise me if it changes.
So looking back through the thread over the last few hours am I right in concluding that lots of people have got excited arguing about the merits or otherwise of a supposed line up for a debate which turns out to be completely bogus?
Yes. What's more, it was obvious from the start that it was bogus, given that the official campaigns haven't yet been chosen.
@OllyT The sole Minnesota poll was also way way way out. Notably it was an old one from January.
Ohio should shed light on the rust belt. If there's another polling failure for Hillary there, it spells trouble in the General in my view.
I'm completely unconvinced by 538's assessment that HRC has a 98% chance there.
I agree - I think she is probably home and dry in Florida and NC but Ohio and Illinois could be interesting given the polling shambles in Michigan. 538 seem to now be showing growing differences in their " polls only" and "polls plus" forecasts. Hedging their bests springs to mind
Primaries are notoriously difficult to model for polling so I'd take all of it with a pinch of salt for now.
I'm trying to work out what any Trump blue-collar Democrats might mean for the Democratic primary in somewhere like Ohio - would it benefit Hillary or Sanders? I can see arguments both ways.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
There isn't really a prominent Labour Remainer either. They are pretty much all keeping a low profile as far as the public can see. Possibly excepting Kinnock. Has he got his party back?
I think Labour, Lib Dems and Greens are all relatively low profile just now, Unsurprising as the Tory bun-fight makes much better copy at the moment. I expect those three parties will all be campaigning pretty hard from about a month out from polling.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
There isn't really a prominent Labour Remainer either. They are pretty much all keeping a low profile as far as the public can see. Possibly excepting Kinnock. Has he got his party back?
I think Labour, Lib Dems and Greens are all relatively low profile just now, Unsurprising as the Tory bun-fight makes much better copy at the moment. I expect those three parties will all be campaigning pretty hard from about a month out from polling.
Labour are pretty much irrelevant and anonymous regarding the whole EUref debate.
More Rust Belt shifts, Trump is no Romney, voter suppression with scare campaigns about opposing the auto bailout won't work this time. The Clintons are the face of NAFTA.
Meanwhile, over the Irish Sea, in the first set of votes on the new Taoiseach, Enda Kenny of FG got 57 votes (which corresponds to FG+Lab) with 94 against, Michaél Martin of FF got 43, with 108 against. (Each vote is a vote on one candidate, and to be selected he or she needs a majority). Gerry Adams got 25 and Richard Boyd-Barrett 9. So, as expected, no result.
However, there is some significance in the vote in that Michaél Martin got only 43, which means he got only FF votes. Both FG and FF had been wooing independents, and there had been some speculation that FF might get some independent support. The fact that they didn't confirms that it is indeed likely to be an FG-led government of some form.
Remain: George Osborne, Alan Johnson, Tim Farron, Caroline Lucas
But the ICM figures show that 34.5% of Labour voters expressing a preference currently intend to vote Leave! That is pretty high surely.
I take your point but a 30% majority for REMAIN amongst Labour voters would probably be enough to ensure BREXIT is defeated. I also wouldn't set much store by any of the EU polls at this stage, they will move around quite a bit between now and June.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Trump's obvious reposte to anything thrown at him tonight is to point out that the other three have had their lines fed to them by Romney and that the only choice is between him and a back room stitch-up.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
There isn't really a prominent Labour Remainer either. They are pretty much all keeping a low profile as far as the public can see. Possibly excepting Kinnock. Has he got his party back?
I think Labour, Lib Dems and Greens are all relatively low profile just now, Unsurprising as the Tory bun-fight makes much better copy at the moment. I expect those three parties will all be campaigning pretty hard from about a month out from polling.
Labour are pretty much irrelevant and anonymous regarding the whole EUref debate.
I have Labour positioned as still flying down the cliff of oblivion they jumped off some months ago, making zooming noises. The thud at the bottom hasn't happened yet.
The best comparison I can think of is the Gadarene Swine.
The blogs I follow at the moment are Labour Uncut (obviously) and, from the capable-of-touching-on-reality fragment of the Far Feft, A Very Public Sociologist who is - I think - Tristram Hunt's CLP Secretary. http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.co.uk/
Why are there no female proponents for Leave on that panel?
Andrea Leadsom, Priti Patel, Andrea Jenkyns, Sarah Wollaston, Kate Hooey or Gisela Stuart would be better than any of that lot.
I see what you mean, but I think it could be electric. Boris, George, Nigel, are all great speakers on their day, but all capable of utter disaster too. Total high stakes gamble.
The BBC has chosen well. The worst Leavers to choose IMHO.
On the other hand, Tim Farron and Caroline Lucas won't set the world on fire either.
Apart from Gove who would have a better claim to be speaking for the BREXITERS?
Delighted Alan Johnson is on the panel, the PB Tories will rubbish him but he has a lot of capital with centre left voters.
Alan Johnson has demonstrated time and time again he knows fuck all about the EU. He talks in soundbites. Probe him on his soundbite statements and he will show how little he really knows. Anyone with a minimal knowledge of the EU and is slightly charismatic will savage him.
Too many polls in Florida today showing Trump's lead in single digits. Trump needs to be above 40 in both Ohio and Florida to be sure that he won't be a victim of tactical voting.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
Gisela Stuart was involved with Blair's government and was appointed by Blair to the negotiations for the European Constitution and has been heavily involved with European politics since then.
According to ICM a quarter of Labour voters are leaning towards Leave. Labour Leave MPs should not be excluded to make room for every crackpot and maverick.
I quite agree but the sensible-wing of LEAVE aren't just going to be able to lock the Kippers etc in a cupboard till June!
Farage at least is leader of a real party that has an MP (even if he doesn't agree with Farage) and millions of voters. Galloway's so-called party didn't even register ten thousand votes at the election.
As I said you have nobody but Farage to blame for Galloway's meteoric rise to the heady heights of the LEAVE campaign.
I hope you don't mistake me for a fan of Farage. I also think the chairwoman of Vote Leave is more at the heights of the Leave campaign than a one time guest speaker invited by Farage.
“WHEN in doubt, shout,” runs the First Ministers’ code. “When in trouble, shout double.”
Going by the decibel count at FMQs, Nicola Sturgeon’s troubles are deep indeed.
Her current headache is GERS, or Government Expenditure and Revenue in Scotland.
Previously a handy tool in the case for independence, it this week became a Unionist cudgel, inconveniently pointing out Scotland has a record £15bn deficit thanks to the oil price collapse.
Faced with the ugliest numbers since Alex Salmond’s modesty ratings met his body mass index, Ms Sturgeon’s choice was between accepting reality and overhauling party strategy or snapping on the blinkers and bawling down all comers. She didn’t hesitate.
@OllyT The sole Minnesota poll was also way way way out. Notably it was an old one from January.
Ohio should shed light on the rust belt. If there's another polling failure for Hillary there, it spells trouble in the General in my view.
I'm completely unconvinced by 538's assessment that HRC has a 98% chance there.
I agree - I think she is probably home and dry in Florida and NC but Ohio and Illinois could be interesting given the polling shambles in Michigan. 538 seem to now be showing growing differences in their " polls only" and "polls plus" forecasts. Hedging their bests springs to mind
Illinois is where Hillary grew up so she should win there but Ohio could be closer
@faisalislam: Labour to announce a "fiscal lock" essentially allowing billions more in spending on investment spending, to take advantage of low int rates
@faisalislam: Labour to announce a "fiscal lock" essentially allowing billions more in spending on investment spending, to take advantage of low int rates
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I would prefer Kelvin Hopkins over any other Labour MP for the televised debate. He makes a strong left-wing case for leaving the EU.
Too many polls in Florida today showing Trump's lead in single digits. Trump needs to be above 40 in both Ohio and Florida to be sure that he won't be a victim of tactical voting.
Obviously Trump would like a comfortable lead, given debate fluctuations. However the implied Cruz > Rubio switch is not nearly as obvious as Rubio > Cru elsewhere, since Rubio's campaign is a sinking ship and Cruz is on the rise.
@SkyNewsBreak: #JohnMcDonnell is expected to say tomorrow that a #Labour government would borrow billions of pounds more to finance infrastructure projects
@faisalislam: Labour to announce a "fiscal lock" essentially allowing billions more in spending on investment spending, to take advantage of low int rates
Fiscal lock? – sounds more like a wheeze to turn on the taps via the back door.
@faisalislam: Labour to announce a "fiscal lock" essentially allowing billions more in spending on investment spending, to take advantage of low int rates
Problem is to Labour "investment" means public sector pay rises, not capital expenditure, which means massively increased structural deficit (again).
@faisalislam: Labour to announce a "fiscal lock" essentially allowing billions more in spending on investment spending, to take advantage of low int rates
Fiscal lock? – sounds more like a wheeze to turn on the taps via the back door.
Fiscal lock was, I think, the lingo when that plan competed with the Tories fiscal charter.
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
There isn't really a prominent Labour Remainer either. They are pretty much all keeping a low profile as far as the public can see. Possibly excepting Kinnock. Has he got his party back?
I think Labour, Lib Dems and Greens are all relatively low profile just now, Unsurprising as the Tory bun-fight makes much better copy at the moment. I expect those three parties will all be campaigning pretty hard from about a month out from polling.
Labour are pretty much irrelevant and anonymous regarding the whole EUref debate.
That is how it should be. We have manners. We do not intervene in family squabbles, particularly, when knives are out.
Leave ahead by a wide margin with everyone over the age of 35. Remain winning with younger people.
The Tory churn since May is interesting as well, currently 43% R, 41% L. 2015 vote is 36% R, 45% L.
In England Leave leads 42% to 39%, across the UK Leave leads just 42% to 41% with 19% don't know. Scotland is strongly for Remain, Wales and the Midlands back Leave, in the North and South Remain leads by only 1% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pd
Nicholas Soames - the friend of Prince Charles (possibly not in the Michael Fawcett sense), who threatened Princess Diana, saying "accidents can happen", denouncing her as being "in the advanced stages of paranoia" when she criticised the record of the outgoing Tory government on landmines - has stepped into the referendum fray.
Does the fact that Soames has involved himself suggest that the source of the "monarch wants Brexit" story was in fact her eldest son, the crown prince?
Because we can't imagine Soames, the moronic Old Etonian who boasts about never using the words "gift" or "toilet", upsetting his pal Charles. The nutcase prince is said once to have encouraged Soames to try for the Tory leadership; and the Torygraph describes him as a member of the prince's "inner circle".
Betty Boothroyd once had to tell him off for crossing the Commons floor to give a young female MoD official the benefit of his manly company. "They may be pretty girls, but we don't do those things." That's right, Betty, make a joke of it if they're posh.
Did I mention what political party Soames belongs to?
With a defender like Soames, and specious arguments such as "she couldn't have said she was for Brexit, because the term 'Brexit' didn't exist at that time" and "whatever she says in private, even if it's widely different from her public position, always keep it quiet" it doesn't look like a happy time for the monarch. Or Gove. Or Soames.
Quite a good time for those who enjoy seeing the Tory party smash itself up, though.
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Why are there no female proponents for Leave on that panel?
Andrea Leadsom, Priti Patel, Andrea Jenkyns, Sarah Wollaston, Kate Hooey or Gisela Stuart would be better than any of that lot.
I see what you mean, but I think it could be electric. Boris, George, Nigel, are all great speakers on their day, but all capable of utter disaster too. Total high stakes gamble.
The BBC has chosen well. The worst Leavers to choose IMHO.
On the other hand, Tim Farron and Caroline Lucas won't set the world on fire either.
Apart from Gove who would have a better claim to be speaking for the BREXITERS?
Delighted Alan Johnson is on the panel, the PB Tories will rubbish him but he has a lot of capital with centre left voters.
Alan Johnson has demonstrated time and time again he knows fuck all about the EU. He talks in soundbites. Probe him on his soundbite statements and he will show how little he really knows. Anyone with a minimal knowledge of the EU and is slightly charismatic will savage him.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Birmingham MP Gisela Stuart 'to head up Vote Leave'
She will chair the board of Vote Leave while Michael Gove, the Justice Secretary, will chair the campaigning committee.
She will replace the former Chancellor of the Exchequer Lord Lawson as chair of Vote Leave, in a matter of days, according to ITV's Robert Peston.
Excellent news.
Lord Lawson does project as a doddery old soul from the past, while Gisela was on top form in a recent outing on the DP where she trounced Nick Boles, if memory serves. Very authoritative that day.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
There isn't really a prominent Labour Remainer either. They are pretty much all keeping a low profile as far as the public can see. Possibly excepting Kinnock. Has he got his party back?
I think Labour, Lib Dems and Greens are all relatively low profile just now, Unsurprising as the Tory bun-fight makes much better copy at the moment. I expect those three parties will all be campaigning pretty hard from about a month out from polling.
Labour are pretty much irrelevant and anonymous regarding the whole EUref debate.
That is how it should be. We have manners. We do not intervene in family squabbles, particularly, when knives are out.
Yes, most unfair when the Tories get involved in the Labour family squabbles. Unsporting.
Really Labour seem to have been pretty sensible the last few months, laying low when they can.
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Were you the same poster that I provided the link to the Yougov article a day or so ago? That used in their opinion the most up to date assessment of turnout whereas BES is from 10 months ago.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
Gisela Stuart was involved with Blair's government and was appointed by Blair to the negotiations for the European Constitution and has been heavily involved with European politics since then.
According to ICM a quarter of Labour voters are leaning towards Leave. Labour Leave MPs should not be excluded to make room for every crackpot and maverick.
Gisela and I both wanted that slot - I argued that I was genuinely keen and also a member of the European Scrutiny Committee, but Tony wanted someone with a more sceptical streak ("too Europhile for Tony Blair" is an interesting distinction to have). She'd be a reasonable choice if a centrist Labour MP is what's wanted; Kelvin would be better if the programme wanted to reflect the current left-wing tilt in the party. They're both good speakers who put their case in persuasive terms - Gisela is more forceful, Kelvin more reasonable in style.
Galloway, by contrast, doesn't represent anyone in Labour at all - even people who I regard as far to the left of Jeremy draw the line at him, feeling he's just an egotist. But he makes good TV, which of course is why the producers want him.
@hattmarris84: Ken Livingstone just now on LBC attacks Dan Jarvis for donations from hedge funds: "It's a bit like Jimmy Savile funding a childrens' group"
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Were you the same poster that I provided the link to the Yougov article a day or so ago? That used in their opinion the most up to date assessment of turnout whereas BES is from 10 months ago.
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Were you the same poster that I provided the link to the Yougov article a day or so ago? That used in their opinion the most up to date assessment of turnout whereas BES is from 10 months ago.
Given yougov's record on predicting the general election result I think I will take the BES figures thankyou
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Birmingham MP Gisela Stuart 'to head up Vote Leave'
She will chair the board of Vote Leave while Michael Gove, the Justice Secretary, will chair the campaigning committee.
She will replace the former Chancellor of the Exchequer Lord Lawson as chair of Vote Leave, in a matter of days, according to ITV's Robert Peston.
Excellent news.
Lord Lawson does project as a doddery old soul from the past, while Gisela was on top form in a recent outing on the DP where she trounced Nick Boles, if memory serves. Very authoritative that day. Agreed.
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Were you the same poster that I provided the link to the Yougov article a day or so ago? That used in their opinion the most up to date assessment of turnout whereas BES is from 10 months ago.
Ipsos' review had the young vote down at 43%.
Yes and there are two factors. 1. Volume of voters, twice as many registered in 65+ than 18-24. 2. The turnout differential which brings it from 2 to 3.5.
Some labour person like maybe Kate Hoey would make more sense than Galloway. Otherwise the selection seems sensible enough. You can't leave Farage out, and given the likely make up of Leave voters more than two Tories isn't really warranted
Someone like Kate Hoey would make much more sense. There seems to be some mischief making in excluding LabourLeave, as if Labour are unanimously behind Remain. It's just not true.
Someone like Kelvin Hopkins would be a more typical spokesperson for those Labour MPs who favour Leave - he's mainstream left-wing, but nothing like Galloway. But fundamentally there is no prominent Labour Leaver.
I never took Kate Hoey as seriously Labour. Gisela, yes but I am not sure why she is a LEAVEr.
Birmingham MP Gisela Stuart 'to head up Vote Leave'
She will chair the board of Vote Leave while Michael Gove, the Justice Secretary, will chair the campaigning committee.
She will replace the former Chancellor of the Exchequer Lord Lawson as chair of Vote Leave, in a matter of days, according to ITV's Robert Peston.
Excellent news.
Lord Lawson does project as a doddery old soul from the past, while Gisela was on top form in a recent outing on the DP where she trounced Nick Boles, if memory serves. Very authoritative that day.
Me too. Nicholas Soames and wardrobes are as inextricably entwined as Douglas Hurd and corncobs. Got to admit that Catherine Weatherall and Alan Clark came up with beautifully apposite expressions that knock "white heat" and "the River Tiber, foaming with much blood" for six.
“WHEN in doubt, shout,” runs the First Ministers’ code. “When in trouble, shout double.”
Going by the decibel count at FMQs, Nicola Sturgeon’s troubles are deep indeed.
Her current headache is GERS, or Government Expenditure and Revenue in Scotland.
Previously a handy tool in the case for independence, it this week became a Unionist cudgel, inconveniently pointing out Scotland has a record £15bn deficit thanks to the oil price collapse.
Faced with the ugliest numbers since Alex Salmond’s modesty ratings met his body mass index, Ms Sturgeon’s choice was between accepting reality and overhauling party strategy or snapping on the blinkers and bawling down all comers. She didn’t hesitate.
LOL, you sad unionists still fighting the referendum, bunch of dullards. Sad losers that cannot win a seat in Scotland whinging on about a referendum that happened a year ago. Is it any wonder nobody votes for such morons.
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Were you the same poster that I provided the link to the Yougov article a day or so ago? That used in their opinion the most up to date assessment of turnout whereas BES is from 10 months ago.
Given yougov's record on predicting the general election result I think I will take the BES figures thankyou
Are you aware of marked registers and the data that they provide weeks after an election on who actually voted?
How party support divides with ICM's latest EU poll: Overall: Remain 40%, Leave 41% Con: Remain 43%, Leave 41% Lab: Remain 53%, Leave 28% LD: Remain 64%, Leave 24% UKIP: Remain 1%, Leave 96% http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pdf
Again this poll has too many 18-24 voters and too few 65+ 245 vs426 a ratio of 1.7 when it should be 3.5 according to that Yougov article. On these figures LEAVE has a clear lead.
As the BES survey I linked to earlier showed youth turnout was below the 66% national average but not as low as the Yougov figures suggested so you cannot assume that
Were you the same poster that I provided the link to the Yougov article a day or so ago? That used in their opinion the most up to date assessment of turnout whereas BES is from 10 months ago.
Ipsos' review had the young vote down at 43%.
May be HYUFD should consider Ipsos as they seem to want to ignore Yougov?
Comments
Doesn't he also own Force India F1 team?
In 08 and 12 I issued health warnings on a vast number of polls I posted on PB usually because the demographic makeup was badly wrong, and the sample size was two men and a dog. Some pollsters also have a lean verging on the horizontal.
I also haven't found a convincing reason for the Michigan polling hash up but there are times when the punters muddy the waters to keep us all honest, and quite right too.
UPDATE: A BBC source gets in touch to kick back: “This is total, 100% nonsense, including the format and the names”. Curiously the Telegraph has the very same names. Though this is a strong denial from the Beeb and an all-male Leave line-up would be very unlike Auntie…
Trump 41 .. Cruz 24 .. Rubio 13 .. Kasich 13
.......................................................................
North Carolina - Civitas
Trump 32 .. Cruz 26 .. Rubio 11 .. Kasich 11
"as part of efforts to raise cash and free jailed founder Subrata Roy."
http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-motor-f1-forceindia-idUKKCN0VB24D
Seems another founder might be in danger of joining him....
Anyway,
I've balanced my book completely against him for POTUS and reduced exposure on the GOP market.
I think it's more likely than not his odds will drift - or at best they'll remain roughly static.
We'll see.
Hillary 68% implied from the last poll there (53:25 with Sanders)
Hillary 53% implied from my black vote% model there. Bearing in mind Michigan and the rest of the midwest, Sanders may well win it.
Trump 36 .. Rubio 27 .. Cruz 19 .. Kasich 10
Whoever of Rubio or Kasich wins their home state gets to be his VP I guess !
http://frontloading.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/2016-republican-delegate-allocation_10.html
Cruz is the only candidate who might win all delegates, and Kasich can win nothing. Unpledged might win delegates also.
Virtually impossible to model the outcome...
I'm trying to work out what any Trump blue-collar Democrats might mean for the Democratic primary in somewhere like Ohio - would it benefit Hillary or Sanders? I can see arguments both ways.
Combined GOP & implied POTUS
Rubio: +7
Trump: +13.1
Cruz: +18.7
Kasich: +10.4
Book FV +13.3
I think it's less likely there'll be an obvious winner from the debate - more likely (but not at all inevitable) that Donald will be the loser.
Or maybe the debate won't have much of an impact?
Anyway, I think it's a risk-event for Donald. And he is surrounded by enemies.
Lay.
http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/03/10/report-46000-pa-democrats-become-republicans-due-to-trump/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-ohio-insight-idUSKCN0WC19Q
More Rust Belt shifts, Trump is no Romney, voter suppression with scare campaigns about opposing the auto bailout won't work this time. The Clintons are the face of NAFTA.
Cruz might be, or Trump might be.
I think Trump will have it easier with the "eastern front", i.e. Rubio, collapsing.
However, there is some significance in the vote in that Michaél Martin got only 43, which means he got only FF votes. Both FG and FF had been wooing independents, and there had been some speculation that FF might get some independent support. The fact that they didn't confirms that it is indeed likely to be an FG-led government of some form.
http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/local-news/birmingham-mp-gisela-stuart-to-11016987
Virgin Islands 9 | 9
District of Columbia 19 | 8
Guam 9 | 6
Florida 99 | 99
Illinois 69 | 63
Missouri 52 | 10
North Carolina 72 | 30
Northern Marianas 9 | 9
Ohio 66 | 0
American Samoa 9 | 6
Arizona 58 | 58
Utah 40 | 20
North Dakota 28 | 12
Wisconsin 42 | 42
Colorado 37 | 16
Wyoming 29 | 13
New York 95 | 65
Connecticut 28 | 11
Delaware 16 | 16
Maryland 38 | 35
Pennsylvania 71 | 56
Rhode Island 19 | 12
Indiana 57 | 26
Nebraska 36 | 36
West Virginia 34 | 0
Oregon 28 | 18
Washington 44 | 28
California 172 | 157
Montana 27 | 27
New Jersey 51 | 51
New Mexico 24 | 17
South Dakota 29 | 29
The best comparison I can think of is the Gadarene Swine.
The blogs I follow at the moment are Labour Uncut (obviously) and, from the capable-of-touching-on-reality fragment of the Far Feft, A Very Public Sociologist who is - I think - Tristram Hunt's CLP Secretary.
http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.co.uk/
Trump needs to be above 40 in both Ohio and Florida to be sure that he won't be a victim of tactical voting.
All sounded both encouraging and plausible – until I got to 'according to Robert Peston' ..!
According to ICM a quarter of Labour voters are leaning towards Leave. Labour Leave MPs should not be excluded to make room for every crackpot and maverick.
That's
Delegates available | Delegated need to be "on track" - based on 538 http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/republicans/with further delegates to make up the difference in areas where Rubio might conceivably make them up
Kasich = 0
If Cruz has a plurality, 6:0:0 to Cruz, else 3:3:0 to the top two.
Doesn't take into account any vote-splitting, or the unpledged getting elected of course...
I'll just model it as PR, and hope that minimizes the errors.
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/politica/id1013699545
Unless it's Jeb Bush.
Trump 38
Rubio 31
Cruz 19
Kasich 4
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-rubio-close-in-fla-primary-washington-post-univision-news-poll-shows/2016/03/10/79c2fb1a-e63a-11e5-a6f3-21ccdbc5f74e_story.html?postshare=7711457620491285&tid=ss_tw
http://www.icmunlimited.com/data/media/pdf/Voting_07thMar16.pd
Does the fact that Soames has involved himself suggest that the source of the "monarch wants Brexit" story was in fact her eldest son, the crown prince?
Because we can't imagine Soames, the moronic Old Etonian who boasts about never using the words "gift" or "toilet", upsetting his pal Charles. The nutcase prince is said once to have encouraged Soames to try for the Tory leadership; and the Torygraph describes him as a member of the prince's "inner circle".
Here he is: Soames, whose ex-wife said that having sex with him was "like having a wardrobe fall on top of you with the key sticking out". The guy who rolled up to the Commons pissed out of his face to discuss the Regional Development Agencies Bill. Imagine if Dennis Skinner did that.
Betty Boothroyd once had to tell him off for crossing the Commons floor to give a young female MoD official the benefit of his manly company. "They may be pretty girls, but we don't do those things." That's right, Betty, make a joke of it if they're posh.
Did I mention what political party Soames belongs to?
Well, he's got an opinion on the story about what the monarch told her dinner guests. He thinks Michael Gove may have committed treason.
With a defender like Soames, and specious arguments such as "she couldn't have said she was for Brexit, because the term 'Brexit' didn't exist at that time" and "whatever she says in private, even if it's widely different from her public position, always keep it quiet" it doesn't look like a happy time for the monarch. Or Gove. Or Soames.
Quite a good time for those who enjoy seeing the Tory party smash itself up, though.
I had an uncharacteristically violent dream the other night which involved stabbing Jeb with his exclamation mark.
It was oddly vivid.
Edit: Note to self. Read thread before posting.
Lord Lawson does project as a doddery old soul from the past, while Gisela was on top form in a recent outing on the DP where she trounced Nick Boles, if memory serves. Very authoritative that day.
Really Labour seem to have been pretty sensible the last few months, laying low when they can.
Galloway, by contrast, doesn't represent anyone in Labour at all - even people who I regard as far to the left of Jeremy draw the line at him, feeling he's just an egotist. But he makes good TV, which of course is why the producers want him.
Lord Lawson does project as a doddery old soul from the past, while Gisela was on top form in a recent outing on the DP where she trounced Nick Boles, if memory serves. Very authoritative that day.
Agreed.
1. Volume of voters, twice as many registered in 65+ than 18-24.
2. The turnout differential which brings it from 2 to 3.5.
Lord Lawson does project as a doddery old soul from the past, while Gisela was on top form in a recent outing on the DP where she trounced Nick Boles, if memory serves. Very authoritative that day.
That is good news.
LOL, you sad unionists still fighting the referendum, bunch of dullards. Sad losers that cannot win a seat in Scotland whinging on about a referendum that happened a year ago.
Is it any wonder nobody votes for such morons.