Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We are now at Peak Bern
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » We are now at Peak Bern
It’s a measure of how weak a candidate Hillary Clinton is that not only has she failed to swat away Bernie Sanders’ challenge for the nomination but three-fifths of the way through she’s still conceding ground to the septuagenarian socialist.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/45/11/75/9740149/3/920x920.jpg
I'm not sure that the contest has done her harm, though. Perhaps her biggest weakness is the perception that she has a sense of entitlement to the presidency. The fact that she's had to slog her way through to the nomination should help mitigate that.
The Manafort effect.
http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2016/apr/09/trump-backers-flood-clark-county-gop-convention-ch/
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/04/10/trump-and-kasich-team-up-to-ambush-cruz-at-michigan-convention/
http://fox59.com/2016/04/10/in-focus-trump-launches-indiana-campaign-team/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw4P6W8ddiA
http://order-order.com/2016/04/11/channel-4-news-reporter-afghans-fighting-british-occupiers-the-real-heroes/
Pretty damning stuff...CH4 would never employ somebody who said similar things in relation to BNP or Britain First "protests" etc.
I agree with Richard though. She is not a natural campaigner or public speaker. She needs to work at it and she has been forced to sharpen her message, improve her performances and weed out at least some of the incompetents in her team. None of this will do her any harm come November.
And she has money to Berne.
(Sorry)
Must agree that Clinton's campaigns appear not to have been great. Barely beating a socialist in a two horse race* isn't impressive.
*There was a third chap early on. Who had about 1% support...
Perhaps she's doing more right than she's being given credit for.
I would not ever countenance voting for someone like Sanders or Corbyn, BUT there is definitely a mood in the air that there are too many very rich people doing obscenely well, and big corporations paying feck all tax.
I will have missed it if it was discussed on here, but Matthew Parris had a decent column on Saturday in the Times saying (more or less) that the Zeitgeist was such that rich people and especially rich politicians are dangerously out of touch and it's but a small step from there to out of office too.
Incidentally here is what Bernie is on track to achieve according to the polls, and a reasonable demographic guess where there are none:
NY 103
Connecticut 18
DC 0
Delaware 7
Maryland 31
Pennsylvania 82
Rhode Island 12
Indiana 44
Guam 5
West Virginia 14
Kentucky 10
Oregon 39
Virgin Islands 4
Puerto Rico 29
North Dakota 12
California 215
Montana 9
New Jersey 39
New Mexico 21
South Dakota 13
Total 1804
Here's what he needs to finish head on pledged delegates according to my maths, polls and best guesses of demographics:
NY 121 (He doesn't actually need to win
Connecticut 32
DC 0 (Any delegates here will be a positive)
Delaware 9
Maryland 28 <- Bernie doing relatively well here compared to previous high black % southern states
Pennsylvania 107
Rhode Island 15
Indiana 49
Guam 5
West Virginia 19
Kentucky 35
Oregon 42
Virgin Islands 4
Puerto Rico 32
North Dakota 13
California 300 !
Montana 15
New Jersey 66
New Mexico 24
South Dakota 14
Total 2026 (HRC 2025) - Big win in California is the main hurdle to the model I think though...
With Hillary, I expect a big swing to the Apathy Party.
https://goo.gl/Qqj0k0
A third of Republican voters who support Donald Trump could turn their backs on their party in November's presidential election if he is denied the nomination in a contested convention, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0X60B3?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews
To be honest, I think rather than make this an issue of morality which gets us into unclear water (is behaving legally immoral? etc) it would be better to take a practical approach. If everyone is taxed a little we can (a) raise far more overall; and (b) it is fairer because everyone pays something. Whereas what we have now are far too many loopholes and exemptions and governments playing Whack-A-Mole with aggressive schemes and those in the middle being clobbered.
The quid pro quo, though, is that the money raised has to be spent wisely and with a real sense that this is other people's money and therefore must not be wasted. People don't feel that this side of the bargain is being kept. Indeed, some feel that some politicians see it as a badge of honour to spend as much money as possible almost regardless of whether value for money is obtained.
It's a bit chicken and egg but until politicians start remembering that the state is always spending other people's money and therefore has a duty to be efficient and sensible and wise in how it spends it and on what it will always be hard to persuade people that the state should take even more from you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/11/david-cameron-mps-tax-affairs-eu-referendum-brexit-leaflet-live/
Stephen D Fisher: Chances of winning: 73% Remain
Sam Wang: Probability of a Trump majority is 70%
So the chance of a Trump-Remain double is just under Evens now at 51.1% !
The fact that the email stuff came so early has turned out to be helpful - it's now very stale, and if the FBI suddenly jumped out with an indictment they'd look ludicrously partial.
http://www.businessinsider.com/amazons-profits-what-people-dont-understand-2013-10
He promised to publish the financial documents on Tuesday - six days ago - and has yet to do so.
Lay Bernie out on Betfair right now if you aren't already doing so imo (He was ~ 15.0 for POTUS last time I looked, far too short).
This is correct. It is just lazy to lump Amazon in with some of the other companies, just because they have massive sales numbers. The one "dodge" they used to do was VAT, but that was shown to have resulted in lower prices for the consumer not higher profits for Amazon (obviously the knock on effect was being able to undercut other businesses). Again it was all about Amazon gaining market share, not making more money.
Amazon have big dreams, big goals, flogging books is a tiny part of that e.g. AWS
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/04/07/2334254/jeff-bezos-aws-will-break-10-billion-this-year
If an accountant did it, then they 100% would have a copy of it.
Therefore the only likely possible outcome is that he did it on paper... and if he did..wow.. thats very very backward.
Go with Trump= lose.
Go with someone else =Trumpers desert=lose
ergo=lose
Amazon have big dreams, big goals, flogging books is a tiny part of that e.g. AWS
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/04/07/2334254/jeff-bezos-aws-will-break-10-billion-this-year
We hear this excuse all the time but just how acceptable is a business model that puts huge numbers of other taxpaying firms out of business, builds up a dominant market position and a truly huge capital value and yet contributes nothing to the society on which it feeds?
It is not Amazon's fault that our tax laws are so idiotic but it is only in the more arcane and remote areas of accountancy that this is not a profitable firm that should be accounting for a proportion of that profit. In the meantime I buy nothing off Amazon I can get anywhere else. I am sure they are hurting as a result.
Other big tech companies are genuinely making massive profits (even post investment) and pulling very elaborate schemes to minimize tax, Amazon isn't the same in that respect.
If he scores marginally under 1237 and still gets in I think that will be more difficult.
Cruz using his superior organisation to eek out a win after being a long way behind in delegates will pretty much guarantee losing Pennslyvania in particular (As the unbounds won't have followed the will of the people in pretty much all scenarios where Cruz wins). Seeing as Virginia is off the map I reckon for all GOP, losing PA as well is curtains.
Speculation that Utah and some other deep red states may come into play with Trump, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Pennslyvania, Florida, Nevada all more likely to be won by Trump rather than Cruz.
PA, NV, FL, VA sees the Democrats home in a romp - so overall I think Trump has more chance than Cruz to win.
I also think there is a bigger chance the GOP could get absolubtely smashed, but if Trump has Utah close then he isn't going to win anyway !
(For the record, while I am aware of it, I have not downloaded it. And nor will I be downloading it.)
#ToryUnity
I believe however the network of journos who have been using the info have it a version that has now been neatly cataloged, searchable etc on a private server. I presume the dump is just that, a raw dump.
At the moment, depending on which source you use, Hillary has a lead in pledged delegates in the range of 220-280. There are 712 unpledged superdelegates so it's highly likely that Hillary will be reliant on at least some for her overall win. Of course, she'll actually get most of the superdelegates - giving her a much more comfortable win rather than putting it at risk - but all the same, she won't technically be assured of victory without a 712 lead in the pledged column.
Forecast sheet
Given the fact that many of these documents are old, my guess would be that they have engaged on a big internal programme to digitise their archives so that they can get rid of the paper copies. You can use your imagination for the rest.
HMRC also send you a tax calculation sheet too I believe & statement of account.
As to all these published tax returns - where are the pension contributions captured and also they can look forward to the ridiculous annual allowance taper being a mess for themselves too for 16/17 onwards ...
Shameful.
There's your big story.
As said, the only explanation is that he's getting someone to engrave it onto an obelisk.
The point of my post was that even normal people like me ( lol ) and not just the usual leftie suspects are getting a bit annoyed at the 0.1%.
* should add for the record I missed the deadline last year and got a nice £100 fine.
Like the tax return itself.
1. The hacking group in question is actually a CIA/Russian front organisation.
2. The hacking group is lying.
I don't think either of these is very likely.
Furthermore, you can see via a simply Google archive search that the claim that the site was running an old version of Wordpress is true. You can also see that the IP address that the domain name used to point to does not seem to be assigned to a data centre provider. (Unless it was one provided by the Panamanian telecoms company.)
Absent compelling evidence to the contrary, this makes the way the hack was described on-line seem very plausible to me.
Islington Council? - er, not so much..!
In that case Mossack Fonseca are idiots! No self-respecting gangster or dodgy oligarch should use them.
This is fishy....
Balanced against a fair market value of ~ £1 million on his share dividends is very interesting indeed
Does anyone else here have such little savings interest and such whacking comparitively large Divi payments ?
Only by the bizarre standards of the American Social Contract could he be considered a left winger. He isn't.
Should that not be declared as a benefit in kind by the lodgee ?
Have you got a PR disaster, has your oil rig blown up and leaking millions of barrels of oil into the ocean, have you been caught at the races with your girlfriend live on BBC news, while your wife watches from home and now the video is all over social media...
Its OK Captain Jezza can stand in and distract the media with utterly useless performances, so bad and incompetent, that the media forget about the original PR disaster....