"A big win for Trump in Indiana overnight has caused Ted Cruz to step aside and the Republican National Committee to declare the property billionaire as the presumptive nominee."
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee? Come on Paddy, set the example!
Nominee elect rather than presumptive? (Normally I am irritated by people talking about the XXX elect when there is no vote.) Where do we go from here? Do the rest of the primaries still take place? Is Kasich still technically in the race?
"A big win for Trump in Indiana overnight has caused Ted Cruz to step aside and the Republican National Committee to declare the property billionaire as the presumptive nominee."
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee? Come on Paddy, set the example!
Technically Trump won't be the nominee until the convention votes him in.
Nominee elect rather than presumptive? (Normally I am irritated by people talking about the XXX elect when there is no vote.) Where do we go from here? Do the rest of the primaries still take place? Is Kasich still technically in the race?
Surely "X elect" is after they are elected but before they are sworn in. Trump will be elected at the convention.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
This is going to be a brutal campaign. I stand by my comments that Trump can overturn his unfavourables more easily than Clinton; especially now she is the only real establishment candidate left in the race.
"A big win for Trump in Indiana overnight has caused Ted Cruz to step aside and the Republican National Committee to declare the property billionaire as the presumptive nominee."
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee? Come on Paddy, set the example!
Technically Trump won't be the nominee until the convention votes him in.
Is Rubio still suspended or has he properly withdrawn now ?
On a technical level it matters as various states' delegates for Cruz now become variously unbound, and reallocated to Trump/Kasich !
Cruz dropping out I assume puts Trump over the 1237 line, or near enough right now though.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
I now expect all the might of the MSM and the rest of the so called Liberal ElIte to wage war on a Trump nomination with all the amunition they have still got in their arsenal.
Trump will certainly make a different POTUS if he crushes the Hillary, like he crushed Cruz.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
"A big win for Trump in Indiana overnight has caused Ted Cruz to step aside and the Republican National Committee to declare the property billionaire as the presumptive nominee."
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee? Come on Paddy, set the example!
Technically Trump won't be the nominee until the convention votes him in.
Is Rubio still suspended or has he properly withdrawn now ?
On a technical level it matters as various states' delegates for Cruz now become variously unbound, and reallocated to Trump/Kasich !
Cruz dropping out I assume puts Trump over the 1237 line, or near enough right now though.
You only ever 'suspend', just in case the frontrunner falls under some kind of bus. In reality, it will amount to the same thing come the covention. Cruz has only technically suspended.
Cruz withdrawing doesn't actively put Trump over the line (no reallocations as yet) but he will sweep up all or nearly all remaining delegates now, which will do so.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
Hillary has only won Marion County by 0.8%, that's really poor. It is 28% african american and clearly she must be very unpopular amongst 'independents' here.
I also note this is the first Trump (overwhelmingly) / Bernie state for a while - naturally if the races had been even you'd have expected the Bernie win, but polling did indicate a HRC win - she'll win the democratic nomination (Bernie's impossible task got harder after tonight as he still needs an even greater % of the delegates than before) - but a Trump blowout in heavily conservative Indiana is a big big moment, and I guess this is why Cruz has withdrawn. If Trump can win CD3 IN, he can win anywhere !
Meanwhile Hilary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
She is not a strong candidate on the left of her party.
She is going to mop up at the general for exactly the reason she is limping now. She won't have to 'pivot', there is not a treausre trove of hypocritical quotes to use from the primary season. She'll just keep sailing down the centre and win.
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
Kasich stays in until Trump hits the number to have an uncontested election. If Trump doesn't the GOP have always said their plan was to have a contested vote where u bound voters can vote for not Trump in a 2nd round. Why would the GAP establishment have wanted Cruz? So Kasich stays in until Trump has sewn it up.
Barring bizarreness it will be Trump vs Clinton. He's going to tear her apart...
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
"A big win for Trump in Indiana overnight has caused Ted Cruz to step aside and the Republican National Committee to declare the property billionaire as the presumptive nominee."
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee? Come on Paddy, set the example!
Technically Trump won't be the nominee until the convention votes him in.
Is Rubio still suspended or has he properly withdrawn now ?
On a technical level it matters as various states' delegates for Cruz now become variously unbound, and reallocated to Trump/Kasich !
Cruz dropping out I assume puts Trump over the 1237 line, or near enough right now though.
You only ever 'suspend', just in case the frontrunner falls under some kind of bus. In reality, it will amount to the same thing come the covention. Cruz has only technically suspended.
Cruz withdrawing doesn't actively put Trump over the line (no reallocations as yet) but he will sweep up all or nearly all remaining delegates now, which will do so.
If a candidate 'suspends' their campaign, it means that financially the campaign is effectively frozen, giving the candidate time to examine the finances and try to get extra money if needed to meet future obligations when the campaign is closed down.
If you terminate your campaign it means that the financial accounts are closed out and all wages and other bills are payable immediately.
'Suspending' the campaign gives you breathing room to organise termination.
Regarding delegates, it would be surprising if - given the 68 days between the last primaries and the convention - many delegates of other (and former) candidates will migrate to the Trump camp.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
CNN and Fox News both quoted that figure this evening.
Given the complexity of campaign financing, with candidate money, campaign money, PAC and SuperPAC money, who spent how much is open to all sorts of definitions.
Trump is going to have to spend a great deal of money post-primaries to set up an infrastructure for the general election.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
"A big win for Trump in Indiana overnight has caused Ted Cruz to step aside and the Republican National Committee to declare the property billionaire as the presumptive nominee."
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee? Come on Paddy, set the example!
Technically Trump won't be the nominee until the convention votes him in.
Is Rubio still suspended or has he properly withdrawn now ?
On a technical level it matters as various states' delegates for Cruz now become variously unbound, and reallocated to Trump/Kasich !
Cruz dropping out I assume puts Trump over the 1237 line, or near enough right now though.
You only ever 'suspend', just in case the frontrunner falls under some kind of bus. In reality, it will amount to the same thing come the covention. Cruz has only technically suspended.
Cruz withdrawing doesn't actively put Trump over the line (no reallocations as yet) but he will sweep up all or nearly all remaining delegates now, which will do so.
If a candidate 'suspends' their campaign, it means that financially the campaign is effectively frozen, giving the candidate time to examine the finances and try to get extra money if needed to meet future obligations when the campaign is closed down.
If you terminate your campaign it means that the financial accounts are closed out and all wages and other bills are payable immediately.
'Suspending' the campaign gives you breathing room to organise termination.
Regarding delegates, it would be surprising if - given the 68 days between the last primaries and the convention - many delegates of other (and former) candidates will migrate to the Trump camp.
- last line should read "candidates do not migrate"
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Or elderly -- especially given Hillary and the Donald also qualify for free bus passes. But surely it is "harridan" not "Jewish" which is most objectionable.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Quite.
To emphasize how weak a candidate HRC is.
One of these days, Daodao, you'll make a contribution the rest of us can make sense of. But not, apparently, to-day.
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
CNN and Fox News both quoted that figure this evening.
Given the complexity of campaign financing, with candidate money, campaign money, PAC and SuperPAC money, who spent how much is open to all sorts of definitions.
Trump is going to have to spend a great deal of money post-primaries to set up an infrastructure for the general election.
I agree campaign spending is complex but the politico story states that he has "lent" his campaign $36m and spent $13m last month. I think he has made a thing of not having super PACs although presumably a number of the generic republican PACs will start to back him.
He has undoubtedly shown a genius for getting free publicity from the media, tricks he no doubt learned in his Apprentice days, and his ability to avoid the very expensive consultants who have traditionally formed a part of any serious campaign is extraordinary.
I think he will find the next step of putting together a national campaign harder and I would expect to see some more familiar faces getting involved but it may be that his biggest contribution to date to American politics is to show it is not all about money.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Or elderly -- especially given Hillary and the Donald also qualify for free bus passes. But surely it is "harridan" not "Jewish" which is most objectionable.
So now the question turns to: do the Democrats have any better ideas on how to stop the Donald than the Republicans did?
Different electorate will make a yuuuge difference. That is the better market for NeverTrump, particularly as Hillary has relatively few positives to go on so negative is her best bet.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
CNN and Fox News both quoted that figure this evening.
Given the complexity of campaign financing, with candidate money, campaign money, PAC and SuperPAC money, who spent how much is open to all sorts of definitions.
Trump is going to have to spend a great deal of money post-primaries to set up an infrastructure for the general election.
I agree campaign spending is complex but the politico story states that he has "lent" his campaign $36m and spent $13m last month. I think he has made a thing of not having super PACs although presumably a number of the generic republican PACs will start to back him.
He has undoubtedly shown a genius for getting free publicity from the media, tricks he no doubt learned in his Apprentice days, and his ability to avoid the very expensive consultants who have traditionally formed a part of any serious campaign is extraordinary.
I think he will find the next step of putting together a national campaign harder and I would expect to see some more familiar faces getting involved but it may be that his biggest contribution to date to American politics is to show it is not all about money.
Without his money Trump would not be the Republican nominee. It's his money that has made him.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
So now the question turns to: do the Democrats have any better ideas on how to stop the Donald than the Republicans did?
Different electorate will make a yuuuge difference. That is the better market for NeverTrump, particularly as Hillary has relatively few positives to go on so negative is her best bet.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
There's a hell of a lot of Don't Normally Vote in the US for Trump to try and woo.
Anybody got any numbers on how much Trump has spent? I have the impression he has got the nomination on the cheap - he has played the MSM brilliantly. But that was just for the Republican nomination. The MSM's sheer explody-headedness of the notion of President Trump is going to be worth tens of millions to him...
CNN and Fox News both quoted that figure this evening.
Given the complexity of campaign financing, with candidate money, campaign money, PAC and SuperPAC money, who spent how much is open to all sorts of definitions.
Trump is going to have to spend a great deal of money post-primaries to set up an infrastructure for the general election.
I agree campaign spending is complex but the politico story states that he has "lent" his campaign $36m and spent $13m last month. I think he has made a thing of not having super PACs although presumably a number of the generic republican PACs will start to back him.
He has undoubtedly shown a genius for getting free publicity from the media, tricks he no doubt learned in his Apprentice days, and his ability to avoid the very expensive consultants who have traditionally formed a part of any serious campaign is extraordinary.
I think he will find the next step of putting together a national campaign harder and I would expect to see some more familiar faces getting involved but it may be that his biggest contribution to date to American politics is to show it is not all about money.
Without his money Trump would not be the Republican nominee. It's his money that has made him.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
She is not a strong candidate on the left of her party.
She is going to mop up at the general for exactly the reason she is limping now. She won't have to 'pivot', there is not a treausre trove of hypocritical quotes to use from the primary season. She'll just keep sailing down the centre and win.
Hillary can continue on her centrist path of supporting open borders, an interventionist foreign policy and pork for the special interests. It is a sure fire vote winner.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
So now the question turns to: do the Democrats have any better ideas on how to stop the Donald than the Republicans did?
Different electorate will make a yuuuge difference. That is the better market for NeverTrump, particularly as Hillary has relatively few positives to go on so negative is her best bet.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
There's a hell of a lot of Don't Normally Vote in the US for Trump to try and woo.
I now expect all the might of the MSM and the rest of the so called Liberal ElIte to wage war on a Trump nomination with all the amunition they have still got in their arsenal.
Trump will certainly make a different POTUS if he crushes the Hillary, like he crushed Cruz.
I seem to spend every morning being rude about the Times coverage of Trump in their comment section. There's bugger all analysis/lots of sneering - stupid fawning over Cruz's wife being a low point. This morning they're complaining that he's not built a big war chest yet. The other day half an article involved cutting and pasting Labroke's odds, as if that was informed insight. It's just so amateurish - these journalists are supposedly based in Washington too. I can only presume they're far too close to the RNC and voting for Hillary.
Kasich stays in until Trump hits the number to have an uncontested election. If Trump doesn't the GOP have always said their plan was to have a contested vote where u bound voters can vote for not Trump in a 2nd round. Why would the GAP establishment have wanted Cruz? So Kasich stays in until Trump has sewn it up.
Barring bizarreness it will be Trump vs Clinton. He's going to tear her apart...
The only time that Trump has looked in serious trouble has been when he was called out over his attacks on Fiorina. He is going to have to be very careful about the way he attacks Hillary, especially given that she is running to be the first-ever female president and so comes with a fair amount of symbolism attached to her candidacy as well.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
My guess is that he's planning to run again in 2020 and wants to be in a position to say 'I told you so'. He does poll considerably better than Trump when pitted in head-to-heads against Hillary.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
My guess is that he's planning to run again in 2020 and wants to be in a position to say 'I told you so'. He does poll considerably better than Trump when pitted in head-to-heads against Hillary.
Aged 67? Seems a bit unlikely, even given the geriatric nature of this year's candidates. I don't think Nikki Haley will be kept awake at night by the thought of facing him four years on.
More likely he has decided, unlike the younger Cruz, that it really is now or never and he might as well carry on in case Trump is eaten by a shark or something. Or he may be angling for Veep and has concluded the convention might make him impossible to ignore.
So now the question turns to: do the Democrats have any better ideas on how to stop the Donald than the Republicans did?
Different electorate will make a yuuuge difference. That is the better market for NeverTrump, particularly as Hillary has relatively few positives to go on so negative is her best bet.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
There's a hell of a lot of Don't Normally Vote in the US for Trump to try and woo.
Personally, I think the phenomenon of Trump v. Hillary won't be unlike that of Sanders v. Hillary.
He will do better than expected, win in some unusual places, run her close elsewhere snapping at her heels, but she will still limp over the line. And be a weak and rapidly unpopular President.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
Do you think it has been? I'm astonished that he's done as well as he has - a far-left (by American standards) activist who wasn't even a Democrat until last year (IIRC?), running the sole mainstream candidate virtually all the way to the convention. If it was a factor, it was surely a very minor one?
So now the question turns to: do the Democrats have any better ideas on how to stop the Donald than the Republicans did?
Different electorate will make a yuuuge difference. That is the better market for NeverTrump, particularly as Hillary has relatively few positives to go on so negative is her best bet.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
There's a hell of a lot of Don't Normally Vote in the US for Trump to try and woo.
Trump's already broken GWB's record for votes - GW had 10.2m, The Donald is on 10.65m already.
Off topic, is there anyone here who knows about breakdown insurance?
I've just had my renewal premium through from the AA: £202.50 for roadside recovery, relay and home start. That's almost as much as I pay for my fully comp car insurance.
So now the question turns to: do the Democrats have any better ideas on how to stop the Donald than the Republicans did?
Different electorate will make a yuuuge difference. That is the better market for NeverTrump, particularly as Hillary has relatively few positives to go on so negative is her best bet.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
But Hillary's Ovaries are not going to Make America Great Again in the rust belt.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
Do you think it has been? I'm astonished that he's done as well as he has - a far-left (by American standards) activist who wasn't even a Democrat until last year (IIRC?), running the sole mainstream candidate virtually all the way to the convention. If it was a factor, it was surely a very minor one?
Nobody who has a balanced mind thinks it is a factor. Unfortunately daodoa has repeatedly proven s/he has a real issue with regards to the chosen race. More worryingly, s/he clearly doesn't realise it, a bit like the Labour Party and the Monday Club.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
Do you think it has been? I'm astonished that he's done as well as he has - a far-left (by American standards) activist who wasn't even a Democrat until last year (IIRC?), running the sole mainstream candidate virtually all the way to the convention. If it was a factor, it was surely a very minor one?
Trump and Sanders are two cheeks of the same anti-establishment/globalisation ARSE, as Steve Hilton has explained.
Kasich stays in until Trump hits the number to have an uncontested election. If Trump doesn't the GOP have always said their plan was to have a contested vote where u bound voters can vote for not Trump in a 2nd round. Why would the GAP establishment have wanted Cruz? So Kasich stays in until Trump has sewn it up.
Barring bizarreness it will be Trump vs Clinton. He's going to tear her apart...
The only time that Trump has looked in serious trouble has been when he was called out over his attacks on Fiorina. He is going to have to be very careful about the way he attacks Hillary, especially given that she is running to be the first-ever female president and so comes with a fair amount of symbolism attached to her candidacy as well.
TBH, I see Hillary as a token man - Carly didn't have her old battleaxe quality.
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
Do you think it has been? I'm astonished that he's done as well as he has - a far-left (by American standards) activist who wasn't even a Democrat until last year (IIRC?), running the sole mainstream candidate virtually all the way to the convention. If it was a factor, it was surely a very minor one?
Nobody who has a balanced mind thinks it is a factor. Unfortunately daodoa has repeatedly proven s/he has a real issue with regards to the chosen race. More worryingly, s/he clearly doesn't realise it, a bit like the Labour Party and the Monday Club.
Off topic, is there anyone here who knows about breakdown insurance?
I've just had my renewal premium through from the AA: £202.50 for roadside recovery, relay and home start. That's almost as much as I pay for my fully comp car insurance.
Off topic, is there anyone here who knows about breakdown insurance?
I've just had my renewal premium through from the AA: £202.50 for roadside recovery, relay and home start. That's almost as much as I pay for my fully comp car insurance.
Kasich stays in until Trump hits the number to have an uncontested election. If Trump doesn't the GOP have always said their plan was to have a contested vote where u bound voters can vote for not Trump in a 2nd round. Why would the GAP establishment have wanted Cruz? So Kasich stays in until Trump has sewn it up.
Barring bizarreness it will be Trump vs Clinton. He's going to tear her apart...
The only time that Trump has looked in serious trouble has been when he was called out over his attacks on Fiorina. He is going to have to be very careful about the way he attacks Hillary, especially given that she is running to be the first-ever female president and so comes with a fair amount of symbolism attached to her candidacy as well.
Just because Clinton has a vagina doesn't mean women should vote for her. If the symbolism is demonstrating that a woman can do all the things male presidents have done - wage pointless wars, lock up blacks for profit, sell the country to the banks and medical companies - then yes I suppose the vagina has symbolism.
Or perhaps it's not about that. Clinton comes with all the baggage her husband generated - every last scandal will be re-examined. Then let's add all her own scandals and where she gets her money and who she associates with and how successful her Benghazi excursion was. And the emails. Trump attacks hypocrisy and lies and maladministration and she's all that. And more - a weak candidate unable to react quickly and unable to connect with anyone who isn't (her husband's) traditional power base. Sanders vs Trump would have been different but Clinton vs Trump? The right hate her as much if not more than the left hate Trump. He's populist change, she is boring status quo...
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
My guess is that he's planning to run again in 2020 and wants to be in a position to say 'I told you so'. He does poll considerably better than Trump when pitted in head-to-heads against Hillary.
Aged 67? Seems a bit unlikely, even given the geriatric nature of this year's candidates. I don't think Nikki Haley will be kept awake at night by the thought of facing him four years on.
More likely he has decided, unlike the younger Cruz, that it really is now or never and he might as well carry on in case Trump is eaten by a shark or something. Or he may be angling for Veep and has concluded the convention might make him impossible to ignore.
Surely Trump's veep has to be a woman? To counter all the negatives surrounding his attitudes to women.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
My guess is that he's planning to run again in 2020 and wants to be in a position to say 'I told you so'. He does poll considerably better than Trump when pitted in head-to-heads against Hillary.
Aged 67? Seems a bit unlikely, even given the geriatric nature of this year's candidates. I don't think Nikki Haley will be kept awake at night by the thought of facing him four years on.
More likely he has decided, unlike the younger Cruz, that it really is now or never and he might as well carry on in case Trump is eaten by a shark or something. Or he may be angling for Veep and has concluded the convention might make him impossible to ignore.
Surely Trump's veep has to be a woman? To counter all the negatives surrounding his attitudes to women.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
My guess is that he's planning to run again in 2020 and wants to be in a position to say 'I told you so'. He does poll considerably better than Trump when pitted in head-to-heads against Hillary.
Aged 67? Seems a bit unlikely, even given the geriatric nature of this year's candidates. I don't think Nikki Haley will be kept awake at night by the thought of facing him four years on.
More likely he has decided, unlike the younger Cruz, that it really is now or never and he might as well carry on in case Trump is eaten by a shark or something. Or he may be angling for Veep and has concluded the convention might make him impossible to ignore.
Surely Trump's veep has to be a woman? To counter all the negatives surrounding his attitudes to women.
Kasich stays in until Trump hits the number to have an uncontested election. If Trump doesn't the GOP have always said their plan was to have a contested vote where u bound voters can vote for not Trump in a 2nd round. Why would the GAP establishment have wanted Cruz? So Kasich stays in until Trump has sewn it up.
Barring bizarreness it will be Trump vs Clinton. He's going to tear her apart...
The only time that Trump has looked in serious trouble has been when he was called out over his attacks on Fiorina. He is going to have to be very careful about the way he attacks Hillary, especially given that she is running to be the first-ever female president and so comes with a fair amount of symbolism attached to her candidacy as well.
Just because Clinton has a vagina doesn't mean women should vote for her. If the symbolism is demonstrating that a woman can do all the things male presidents have done - wage pointless wars, lock up blacks for profit, sell the country to the banks and medical companies - then yes I suppose the vagina has symbolism.
Or perhaps it's not about that. Clinton comes with all the baggage her husband generated - every last scandal will be re-examined. Then let's add all her own scandals and where she gets her money and who she associates with and how successful her Benghazi excursion was. And the emails. Trump attacks hypocrisy and lies and maladministration and she's all that. And more - a weak candidate unable to react quickly and unable to connect with anyone who isn't (her husband's) traditional power base. Sanders vs Trump would have been different but Clinton vs Trump? The right hate her as much if not more than the left hate Trump. He's populist change, she is boring status quo...
I don't think Trump is going to have much success in attacking Hillary from the left. And, yes, her having a vagina is going to make it harder for him to deploy the kinds of attack he has deployed against his Republican rivals. When he tried it against Fiorina it did not work for him.
O/T, but are the projections to the number of councils that will change hands, rather than seats?
I don't think anyone's done any projections as to which councils will change hands, just speculation as to which ones might. This article might be useful:
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
Do you think it has been? I'm astonished that he's done as well as he has - a far-left (by American standards) activist who wasn't even a Democrat until last year (IIRC?), running the sole mainstream candidate virtually all the way to the convention. If it was a factor, it was surely a very minor one?
Nobody who has a balanced mind thinks it is a factor. Unfortunately daodoa has repeatedly proven s/he has a real issue with regards to the chosen race. More worryingly, s/he clearly doesn't realise it, a bit like the Labour Party and the Monday Club.
No, I am not prejudiced - last year, I voted for a Jewish Tory councillor in the local elections, because he was an excellent candidate - I had not previously voted Tory since 1997. However, given that approximately 10% of the population in both the UK and USA have been shown to be anti-Semitic in various surveys, being Jewish (or from any other ethnic minority) is an electoral handicap - that is all that I was pointing out. In an earlier post, TimB (who I understand is US-based) stated "Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks."
Now that the US primaries are effectively over, the only remaining question about the POTUS election is whether the harridan will be trumped in November. She is a weak "establishment" candidate with many negatives and skeletons in the cupboard, who has had great difficulty in seeing off an elderly Jewish socialist in the primaries. She will need the support from the rainbow coalition of outsiders who backed Obama and who chose him over her in 2008. Trump has shown that he is a formidable fighter; the current odds against him seem too generous.
Forgive me for asking, but why did you need to add Jewish there? What difference does that make to your analysis?
Because Sanders is Jewish? Unfortunately that might be a factor for some folks.
Do you think it has been? I'm astonished that he's done as well as he has - a far-left (by American standards) activist who wasn't even a Democrat until last year (IIRC?), running the sole mainstream candidate virtually all the way to the convention. If it was a factor, it was surely a very minor one?
Nobody who has a balanced mind thinks it is a factor. Unfortunately daodoa has repeatedly proven s/he has a real issue with regards to the chosen race. More worryingly, s/he clearly doesn't realise it, a bit like the Labour Party and the Monday Club.
That account is just trolling imo.
Sadly I disagree - I've seen rather similar thinking by a few in the Times, trolling behind a paywall seems a bit pointless to me. One even made several attempts to claim that it wasn't Corbyn with hammer/sickle flags, but old photos of Hoxha... Andrew Neil keeps retweeting some of the worst he's had and again it's more of the same. The C4 ICM poll about Muslim views mentions that about 5% of the general population think Jews have too much power et al.
What on earth does Kasich think he is doing? How can he ask the party to waste time and money when he would not get close to Trump if he won every remaining delegate? He really should have given up a while ago.
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
My guess is that he's planning to run again in 2020 and wants to be in a position to say 'I told you so'. He does poll considerably better than Trump when pitted in head-to-heads against Hillary.
Aged 67? Seems a bit unlikely, even given the geriatric nature of this year's candidates. I don't think Nikki Haley will be kept awake at night by the thought of facing him four years on.
More likely he has decided, unlike the younger Cruz, that it really is now or never and he might as well carry on in case Trump is eaten by a shark or something. Or he may be angling for Veep and has concluded the convention might make him impossible to ignore.
Surely Trump's veep has to be a woman? To counter all the negatives surrounding his attitudes to women.
Undefined discussion subject.
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
"Presemumptively" this won't yet be enough to persuade those tight-fisted bookies to pay-up up on bets naming Trump as the Republican nominee?
Come on Paddy, set the example!
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/englands-2016-local-elections-an-indicator-of-the-national-political-picture/
On a technical level it matters as various states' delegates for Cruz now become variously unbound, and reallocated to Trump/Kasich !
Cruz dropping out I assume puts Trump over the 1237 line, or near enough right now though.
I now expect all the might of the MSM and the rest of the so called Liberal ElIte to wage war on a Trump nomination with all the amunition they have still got in their arsenal.
Trump will certainly make a different POTUS if he crushes the Hillary, like he crushed Cruz.
Cruz withdrawing doesn't actively put Trump over the line (no reallocations as yet) but he will sweep up all or nearly all remaining delegates now, which will do so.
My favourite was her telling Reince Priebus to eff off and declaring she was now campaigning for GOP4Hillary...
Meanwhile Hillary staggers on, inevitable but weak. Sanders is damaging her and the Democratic party. Her inability to put him away should make those who think she is somehow going to crush Trump pause. This is not a strong candidate.
I also note this is the first Trump (overwhelmingly) / Bernie state for a while - naturally if the races had been even you'd have expected the Bernie win, but polling did indicate a HRC win - she'll win the democratic nomination (Bernie's impossible task got harder after tonight as he still needs an even greater % of the delegates than before) - but a Trump blowout in heavily conservative Indiana is a big big moment, and I guess this is why Cruz has withdrawn. If Trump can win CD3 IN, he can win anywhere !
She is going to mop up at the general for exactly the reason she is limping now. She won't have to 'pivot', there is not a treausre trove of hypocritical quotes to use from the primary season. She'll just keep sailing down the centre and win.
Wonder what % of the vote Trump will get in West Virginia and New Jersey now... could be 75-25 upwards jobs.
Barring bizarreness it will be Trump vs Clinton. He's going to tear her apart...
If you terminate your campaign it means that the financial accounts are closed out and all wages and other bills are payable immediately.
'Suspending' the campaign gives you breathing room to organise termination.
Regarding delegates, it would be surprising if - given the 68 days between the last primaries and the convention - many delegates of other (and former) candidates will migrate to the Trump camp.
Trump is Republican winner while Clinton stumbled on. Not many saw that Clinton would have a longer fight.
The worry for Clinton must be momentum.
Given the complexity of campaign financing, with candidate money, campaign money, PAC and SuperPAC money, who spent how much is open to all sorts of definitions.
Trump is going to have to spend a great deal of money post-primaries to set up an infrastructure for the general election.
He has undoubtedly shown a genius for getting free publicity from the media, tricks he no doubt learned in his Apprentice days, and his ability to avoid the very expensive consultants who have traditionally formed a part of any serious campaign is extraordinary.
I think he will find the next step of putting together a national campaign harder and I would expect to see some more familiar faces getting involved but it may be that his biggest contribution to date to American politics is to show it is not all about money.
This is going to be one hell of a dirty election.
However, moderates + most Bernie radicals + more women than usual = Hillary victory.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/03/the-man-behind-the-hilarious-conservative-pundit-parody-account-speaks-out/#ixzz47egNRuFD
Great interview with the hilarious Conservative Pundit.
True of course...but as predicted shortly after the 'deal' was announced, the government has already given up trying to pretend otherwise...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3572284/PM-s-EU-benefits-deal-won-t-cut-migration-Think-tank-questions-emergency-brake-plan-just-one-ten-EU-immigrants-claim-handouts-arrival.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/4hs5le/ted_cruz_repeatedly_elbowing_his_wife_in_the_face/
More likely he has decided, unlike the younger Cruz, that it really is now or never and he might as well carry on in case Trump is eaten by a shark or something. Or he may be angling for Veep and has concluded the convention might make him impossible to ignore.
He will do better than expected, win in some unusual places, run her close elsewhere snapping at her heels, but she will still limp over the line. And be a weak and rapidly unpopular President.
I've just had my renewal premium through from the AA: £202.50 for roadside recovery, relay and home start. That's almost as much as I pay for my fully comp car insurance.
I think they're taking the Frau Merkel.
Are there any better offers out there?
I can see the Electoral College being very close.
Wow. Trump it is. Well done to all the PBers who have been betting heavily on him. I bet on anybody but him :-(
They get better customer feedback too.
Or perhaps it's not about that. Clinton comes with all the baggage her husband generated - every last scandal will be re-examined. Then let's add all her own scandals and where she gets her money and who she associates with and how successful her Benghazi excursion was. And the emails. Trump attacks hypocrisy and lies and maladministration and she's all that. And more - a weak candidate unable to react quickly and unable to connect with anyone who isn't (her husband's) traditional power base. Sanders vs Trump would have been different but Clinton vs Trump? The right hate her as much if not more than the left hate Trump. He's populist change, she is boring status quo...
Do they no longer do Scottish independence polls?
Conservatives have 3. Rest Labour
These are Tory seat numbers.
0 seats = Corbyn Landslide
1 Seat = Jezza majority
2 seats = disaster JeZza may have a chance
3 seats = disappointing
4 = mildly disappointing
5 = Good
6 = Very good
7-9 = Fantastic
10+ = Beyond wildest expectations
How long until Clinton ties up her nomination?
The article actually says "perform strongly in places such as Stockport, Milton Keynes, Thurrock and Watford", not 'win'.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/englands-2016-local-elections-an-indicator-of-the-national-political-picture/