politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Vladimir Putin link looks set to dog the Trump campaign right through to November
Above is a new ad from the Clinton campaign seeking to raise doubts over Trump’s linkages with the Russian President Vladimir Putin. It seems to have been aimed at the Republican party establishment and I think it is very effective.
Trump staging a recovery in betting markets, my view:
There has been a stabilization of Hillary's lead at around 5 points in my daily tracking average since Wednesday, and there is a picture emerging that Trump's campaign actually exists, so there is some good news for him that warrants that small recovery.
Smith crashing again in betting markets, my view:
I don't know why, the picture hasn't changed, Smith is a goner as usual but only now has the market found out about it ?
Last info I had was Corbyn beating Smith by 60-25 two weeks ago by someone working at Smith's phonebanks, since then I can only imagine it's been down hill for Smith especially after a pretty bad performance in the debate.
Anyway, it was always a mystery for me as to why was Smith regarded that high in the past on the markets.
At Betfair, Paul Ryan can be backed at 100, Kasich at 620, Pence at 870, Bush, Cruz and Rubio each at 1000., and Johnson at 210.
Congresswoman Karen Bass (California, Dem) has started a petition (with hashtag #DiagnoseTrump) calling on "mental health professionals" to urge the Republican party to "conduct an evaluation" of Trump's mental health.
She means well, but she should have asked me to write the copy; I'd have written it much better.
It's possible that this could hurt Trump's chances a lot, even finish them. He wields his bravado skilfully, and it's been a strength not a weakness, but his lack of self-control is another matter.
"Mr Trump has had a recent complete medical examination that showed only positive results"
Well that's a relief. His heart rate wasn't negative, then.
"Actually, his blood pressure, 110/65, and laboratory test results were astonishingly excellent"
I'm not making this up. Those are quotes from the signed statement by Harold Bornstein - a medic who says he has been Trump's personal physician for 35 years - published by Donald Trump himself on his website. The statement is heads "To Whom My Concern" (sic). It ends
"If elected, Mr Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency".
Being able to state something without equivocation doesn't make it true, even if you're a quack. It doesn't even make it sensible.
Starting a sentence with "Actually", followed by a comma - I wonder how often Trump himself does that in his books?
Congresswoman Karen Bass (California, Dem) has started a petition (with hashtag #DiagnoseTrump) calling on "mental health professionals" to urge the Republican party to "conduct an evaluation" of Trump's mental health.
Wow, what an unpleasant petition. You'd have thought she would have known better.
Congresswoman Karen Bass (California, Dem) has started a petition (with hashtag #DiagnoseTrump) calling on "mental health professionals" to urge the Republican party to "conduct an evaluation" of Trump's mental health.
Wow, what an unpleasant petition. You'd have thought she would have known better.
But she's on the side of goodness and light (aka the Democrats) so it's just not possible for her to be unpleasant, vicious and casually dismissive of people with real problems.
Congresswoman Karen Bass (California, Dem) has started a petition (with hashtag #DiagnoseTrump) calling on "mental health professionals" to urge the Republican party to "conduct an evaluation" of Trump's mental health.
Wow, what an unpleasant petition. You'd have thought she would have known better.
Charming women, as if those with mental health issues aren’t stigmatised enough already.
She's vulnerable on foreign policy so this attack is designed to shift Trump away from ground where he can beat her.
It's more than that, she's vulnerable on further leaks from the DNC hack, which is credibly connected to Russia. This gives her something to hit Trump back with when he tries to use whatever else comes out.
Hillary's paranoia about Putin is disturbing. What's up with her ?
You mean apart from the evidence that Russian state sponsored actors hacked DNC emails, the army of Russian online AstroTurfers are now posing as Americans and pushing pro-Trump nonsense and that key members of Trump's staff have links to the Putin sphere of influence?
Can the Dems Swiftboat Trump? Oh, brave new world!
There was an article about two weeks ago in the Christian Science Monitor about how Michael Dukakis spends his days wandering the streets of Boston in a mildly disheveled state, picking up litter and tossing it into the nearest garbage can. Sometime this morning, as he performs this particular civic duty, haunted by visions of Willie Horton, he will stop, pump his fist victoriously in the air once, and not know why….
She's vulnerable on foreign policy so this attack is designed to shift Trump away from ground where he can beat her.
It's more than that, she's vulnerable on further leaks from the DNC hack, which is credibly connected to Russia. This gives her something to hit Trump back with when he tries to use whatever else comes out.
Indeed, by tying Putin to the hacks and Trump to Putin, she implies that Trump may have had something to do with the hack.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Hillary's paranoia about Putin is disturbing. What's up with her ?
So, do you think Putin is a friend to the USA?
Hilary is opposed by an insurgent. Insurgents will pull down the corrupt Western political system. Putin is friends with Trump. Therefore Putin is good.
Hillary's paranoia about Putin is disturbing. What's up with her ?
You mean apart from the evidence that Russian state sponsored actors hacked DNC emails, the army of Russian online AstroTurfers are now posing as Americans and pushing pro-Trump nonsense and that key members of Trump's staff have links to the Putin sphere of influence?
I can't imagine.
So in your imaginings Brother Vlad has a delicious problem with crooked Hillary. Does he use the dirt he's got and destroy her now or hold fire and have her in his pocket as a compromised Potus ?
Hillary's paranoia about Putin is disturbing. What's up with her ?
So, do you think Putin is a friend to the USA?
Hilary is opposed by an insurgent. Insurgents will pull down the corrupt Western political system. Putin is friends with Trump. Therefore Putin is good.
I suppose it follows some sort of logic, Interesting to see a explanation of Moniker's reasoning.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Crimea used to be part of Russia until 1954 when it was transferred to Ukraine by Khrushchev, but of course remained within the USSR. Most of the people in Crimea are of Russian origin. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18287223 Would you really have sent in the troops?
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
Being simplistic, and politics is easier to understand that way, Putin is a Russian nationalist.
He stands up for Russian interests, not those of someone else. Trump regards himself as an American nationalist standing up for American interests - that's his brand. So he regards Putin as being like-minded, and as long as it doesn't clash with his own and American interests, he's OK.
You may not agree with Trump (and I don't), but you don't need to bring in conspiracy theories. You can leave that to Hillary.
Being simplistic, and politics is easier to understand that way, Putin is a Russian nationalist.
He stands up for Russian interests, not those of someone else. Trump regards himself as an American nationalist standing up for American interests - that's his brand. So he regards Putin as being like-minded, and as long as it doesn't clash with his own and American interests, he's OK.
You may not agree with Trump (and I don't), but you don't need to bring in conspiracy theories. You can leave that to Hillary.
Being simplistic, and politics is easier to understand that way, Putin is a Russian nationalist.
He stands up for Russian interests, not those of someone else. Trump regards himself as an American nationalist standing up for American interests - that's his brand. So he regards Putin as being like-minded, and as long as it doesn't clash with his own and American interests, he's OK.
You may not agree with Trump (and I don't), but you don't need to bring in conspiracy theories. You can leave that to Hillary.
Quite. This dismal candidate, Mrs Clinton, thought her husband's bimbo eruption with Miss Lewinsky was part of a " vast right-wing conspiracy ". A kook.
Mr. Mark, quite well. I've got a lot to try and write, and 13 articles in a month on F1 is excessive. The Olympics provides a distraction, should I want one.
The fact I've been rubbish at the race weekend bets [those offered in my regular pieces] makes the wait easier to bear. It's irksome when I'm doing pretty well, like in 2012, because it disrupts a good run.
"He attacked Cameron for cronyism for producing a resignation honours list. Yet he had lobbied for his own crony to appear on the list. He told journalists that Chakrabarti was ‘fiercely independent’. But she wasn’t, and he knew she wasn’t. Because if she had been, she would have turned down his offer of a peerage out of hand.
But Corbyn is not alone in his duplicity. To listen to some of her defenders, you would think Chakrabarti was some innocent dupe who had just rolled into Westminster on the back of a turnip truck. Instead of what she is, which is just another sanctimonious, self-righteous, Left-wing moraliser who adopts ‘do as I say, not as I do’ as their rallying cry."
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
Incidentally, watched the BBC News at Ten. They reported the Belgium machete attack and that the Belgian PM thought it was terrorism, but never once mentioned the lunatic involved shouted 'Allahu Akbar'. Top reporting, there.
Incidentally, watched the BBC News at Ten. They reported the Belgium machete attack and that the Belgian PM thought it was terrorism, but never once mentioned the lunatic involved shouted 'Allahu Akbar'. Top reporting, there.
Cheer up. Teresa's going to give BBC News to James Murdoch, probably with a sizable bung, too
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
You mean nuke them ? When over 80% of the population are ethnic Russians. Crimea was only given over to the Ukraine in 1954 simply to increase the "Russian" population in Ukraine.
You should only worry about the Tatars who are just innocent victims every time.
Incidentally, watched the BBC News at Ten. They reported the Belgium machete attack and that the Belgian PM thought it was terrorism, but never once mentioned the lunatic involved shouted 'Allahu Akbar'. Top reporting, there.
"He attacked Cameron for cronyism for producing a resignation honours list. Yet he had lobbied for his own crony to appear on the list. He told journalists that Chakrabarti was ‘fiercely independent’. But she wasn’t, and he knew she wasn’t. Because if she had been, she would have turned down his offer of a peerage out of hand.
But Corbyn is not alone in his duplicity. To listen to some of her defenders, you would think Chakrabarti was some innocent dupe who had just rolled into Westminster on the back of a turnip truck. Instead of what she is, which is just another sanctimonious, self-righteous, Left-wing moraliser who adopts ‘do as I say, not as I do’ as their rallying cry."
Mr. Surbiton, reporting that the Belgians think it's terror-related without mentioning the bloke was shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is like reporting they think an attack is Nazi-related without mentioning the bloke had a swastika armband and was wearing an Iron Cross.
Also, if you don't think there's an issue with partial reporting or a deliberate effort to distort or hide the truth from the public after the Rotherham disgrace then I'd invite you to reconsider whether that's really the case. Having a media we can trust it's an optional extra for a functioning society, it's essential.
Being simplistic, and politics is easier to understand that way, Putin is a Russian nationalist.
He stands up for Russian interests, not those of someone else. Trump regards himself as an American nationalist standing up for American interests - that's his brand. So he regards Putin as being like-minded, and as long as it doesn't clash with his own and American interests, he's OK.
You may not agree with Trump (and I don't), but you don't need to bring in conspiracy theories. You can leave that to Hillary.
Quite. This dismal candidate, Mrs Clinton, thought her husband's bimbo eruption with Miss Lewinsky was part of a " vast right-wing conspiracy ". A kook.
It was a vast right wing conspiracy. Clearly they were jealous. Right wingers do have smaller ones. Just look at Trump's hand !
Mr. Surbiton, reporting that the Belgians think it's terror-related without mentioning the bloke was shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is like reporting they think an attack is Nazi-related without mentioning the bloke had a swastika armband and was wearing an Iron Cross.
Also, if you don't think there's an issue with partial reporting or a deliberate effort to distort or hide the truth from the public after the Rotherham disgrace then I'd invite you to reconsider whether that's really the case. Having a media we can trust it's an optional extra for a functioning society, it's essential.
Torygraph reporting that the city are saying boll**ks to passporting and staying in the single market because the price of doing so - EU imposing rules on them - isn't worth it.
Interesting. How quickly the idea that running your own affairs = greater prosperity is taking root.
Torygraph reporting that the city are saying boll**ks to passporting and staying in the single market because the price of doing so - EU imposing rules on them - isn't worth it.
Interesting. How quickly the idea that running your own affairs = greater prosperity is taking root.
Mr. Surbiton, reporting that the Belgians think it's terror-related without mentioning the bloke was shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is like reporting they think an attack is Nazi-related without mentioning the bloke had a swastika armband and was wearing an Iron Cross.
Also, if you don't think there's an issue with partial reporting or a deliberate effort to distort or hide the truth from the public after the Rotherham disgrace then I'd invite you to reconsider whether that's really the case. Having a media we can trust it's an optional extra for a functioning society, it's essential.
I mentioned watching a PBS America docu on the Munich Olympics/hostages yesterday [it's bound to be repeated on FreeSat/Freeview].
The wife of the murdered fencing team leader fought for 20yrs to get details of the police operations/negotiations with Palestinians. The German authorities pretended they didn't have any records...then someone leaked a batch to her. She finally secured several thousand pages of evidence showing the full horror of it all.
It all sounds so incredibly reminiscent of a culture of cover-up re Cologne et al.
The most depressing part of the whole docu was that it's taken 43yrs for the Germans to recognise the 12 murdered with a memorial. And they've never been honoured/mentioned at any Olympics - it'd spoil the atmosphere/not appropriate/blah blah handwaving.
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
At Betfair, Paul Ryan can be backed at 100, Kasich at 620, Pence at 870, Bush, Cruz and Rubio each at 1000., and Johnson at 210.
Congresswoman Karen Bass (California, Dem) has started a petition (with hashtag #DiagnoseTrump) calling on "mental health professionals" to urge the Republican party to "conduct an evaluation" of Trump's mental health.
She means well, but she should have asked me to write the copy; I'd have written it much better.
It's possible that this could hurt Trump's chances a lot, even finish them. He wields his bravado skilfully, and it's been a strength not a weakness, but his lack of self-control is another matter.
"Mr Trump has had a recent complete medical examination that showed only positive results"
Well that's a relief. His heart rate wasn't negative, then.
"Actually, his blood pressure, 110/65, and laboratory test results were astonishingly excellent"
I'm not making this up. Those are quotes from the signed statement by Harold Bornstein - a medic who says he has been Trump's personal physician for 35 years - published by Donald Trump himself on his website. The statement is heads "To Whom My Concern" (sic). It ends
"If elected, Mr Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency".
Being able to state something without equivocation doesn't make it true, even if you're a quack. It doesn't even make it sensible.
Starting a sentence with "Actually", followed by a comma - I wonder how often Trump himself does that in his books?
Trump surrounds himself with Yes-men or women, even Quacks ! Has anyone seen his wife after trying to be Michelle Obama ?
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha !
Mr. Surbiton, reporting that the Belgians think it's terror-related without mentioning the bloke was shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is like reporting they think an attack is Nazi-related without mentioning the bloke had a swastika armband and was wearing an Iron Cross.
Also, if you don't think there's an issue with partial reporting or a deliberate effort to distort or hide the truth from the public after the Rotherham disgrace then I'd invite you to reconsider whether that's really the case. Having a media we can trust it's an optional extra for a functioning society, it's essential.
No saying you think it is terrorism related without mentioning that is simply being simplistic. No report includes all pertinent facts or reports would never end.
If you were saying it is not terrorism related (like after the recent London stabbings) while not mentioning Allahu Akhbar etc then that would be duplicitous.
Mr. Thompson, there was plenty of time, and it's an obvious and relevant piece of information to report. There was time to report the Belgian PM was flying home from holiday, after all.
Saying it is 'thought' to be terrorism and not including information most people would regard as rather confirming that is not accurate reporting.
Hillary's paranoia about Putin is disturbing. What's up with her ?
You mean apart from the evidence that Russian state sponsored actors hacked DNC emails, the army of Russian online AstroTurfers are now posing as Americans and pushing pro-Trump nonsense and that key members of Trump's staff have links to the Putin sphere of influence?
I can't imagine.
So in your imaginings Brother Vlad has a delicious problem with crooked Hillary. Does he use the dirt he's got and destroy her now or hold fire and have her in his pocket as a compromised Potus ?
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha !
ABC gives Hillary a larger lead today but even with them Trump is polling slightly better than he was in June and doing about as well as McCain did in 2008, hardly grounds for withdrawal
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha !
ABC gives Hillary a larger lead today but even with them Trump is polling slightly better than he was in June and doing about as well as McCain did in 2008, hardly grounds for withdrawal
I sincerely hope he does not withdraw. We could even see a 50-0 for the first time ever.
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha !
ABC gives Hillary a larger lead today but even with them Trump is polling slightly better than he was in June and doing about as well as McCain did in 2008, hardly grounds for withdrawal
I sincerely hope he does not withdraw. We could even see a 50-0 for the first time ever.
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Interesting. Does anyone know how that compares to WH2012 at this stage?
I'd like Gary Johnson to win. He won't, of course, but that leads me to wonder how much of his support is unhappy Republicans who will grit their teeth and vote Trump when it comes to it. That said some of them would probably rather have Clinton than him win anyway.
Inevitably PB comments descends into a struggle to find any, ANY reason to avoid criticising a candidate on the centre-right, and to criticise a candidate on the centre-left. Even Trump is apparently less newsworthy than some congresswoman.
Torygraph reporting that the city are saying boll**ks to passporting and staying in the single market because the price of doing so - EU imposing rules on them - isn't worth it.
Interesting. How quickly the idea that running your own affairs = greater prosperity is taking root.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
Corbyn is pledged to using the empty Trident missile silos to each house a Blairite MP, after he wins the next election....
Torygraph reporting that the city are saying boll**ks to passporting and staying in the single market because the price of doing so - EU imposing rules on them - isn't worth it.
Interesting. How quickly the idea that running your own affairs = greater prosperity is taking root.
Good to hear. The City know that the EU would like to destroy it as a centre, so they're starting to think they might as well take advantage of the situation and look to other markets without the overbearing shackles of EU legislation. The EU will probably respond by introducing the FTT they've talked about for years.
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha !
ABC gives Hillary a larger lead today but even with them Trump is polling slightly better than he was in June and doing about as well as McCain did in 2008, hardly grounds for withdrawal
I sincerely hope he does not withdraw. We could even see a 50-0 for the first time ever.
Even Goldwater and McGovern won at least a state despite losing by over 20% and Trump is nowhere near that level of deficit. He is bound to win South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Wyoming and Idaho regardless of what happens
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Interesting. Does anyone know how that compares to WH2012 at this stage?
I'd like Gary Johnson to win. He won't, of course, but that leads me to wonder how much of his support is unhappy Republicans who will grit their teeth and vote Trump when it comes to it. That said some of them would probably rather have Clinton than him win anyway.
Romney was about 6% behind Obama after the conventions but he almost halved that deficit in the debates. Johnson will cost Trump but then Stein will cost Hillary
Having absolutely zero skin in the game, as I'm not a yank, but clearly understanding that POTUS is a fairly important job, I've come to the conclusion that I'd have to hold my nose and vote for Clinton. Trump would be good for a laugh, but now is perhaps not the time to indulge in comedy. It's indicative of the parlous state of US politics that it's come down to a choice between two deeply unpleasant characters, but there it is. America is screaming out for a change, but only ever seems to get offered more of the same. Bit like us, really !
Having absolutely zero skin in the game, as I'm not a yank, but clearly understanding that POTUS is a fairly important job, I've come to the conclusion that I'd have to hold my nose and vote for Clinton. Trump would be good for a laugh, but now is perhaps not the time to indulge in comedy. It's indicative of the parlous state of US politics that it's come down to a choice between two deeply unpleasant characters, but there it is. America is screaming out for a change, but only ever seems to get offered more of the same. Bit like us, really !
Trump offers more of a change for the U.S. than any candidate in decades. Anti immigration, anti free trade, pro Russia that would be a sea change in U.S. policy
With Reuters yesterday having Trump just 3% behind Hillary and LAT less than 1% behind he is certainly not going to back out now, especially as on that polling he is doing better than the 3.8% margin Romney lost to Obama. Hillary's convention bounce has clearly started to fade
Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha ! Ha, ha ha !
Its like watching brexit referendum all over again.
Out of interest which of the US pollsters work to the same standards as our own?
The problem I see is that Trump is not a normal Republican candidate so as with the referendum it makes it difficult to use past demographic data as I suspect Trump will attract a different demographic to the previous GOP candidates along with a whole slew of people who haven't bothered to vote for ages.
Having absolutely zero skin in the game, as I'm not a yank, but clearly understanding that POTUS is a fairly important job, I've come to the conclusion that I'd have to hold my nose and vote for Clinton. Trump would be good for a laugh, but now is perhaps not the time to indulge in comedy. It's indicative of the parlous state of US politics that it's come down to a choice between two deeply unpleasant characters, but there it is. America is screaming out for a change, but only ever seems to get offered more of the same. Bit like us, really !
Given the choices on offer, I can see why the Can't Be Arsed Party does so well in the USA...
Having absolutely zero skin in the game, as I'm not a yank, but clearly understanding that POTUS is a fairly important job, I've come to the conclusion that I'd have to hold my nose and vote for Clinton. Trump would be good for a laugh, but now is perhaps not the time to indulge in comedy. It's indicative of the parlous state of US politics that it's come down to a choice between two deeply unpleasant characters, but there it is. America is screaming out for a change, but only ever seems to get offered more of the same. Bit like us, really !
It is amazing that the two people America thinks most suitable for President are Trump and Hillary or that of the probable last 5 presidents 4 were related to each other. That's banana republic level governance.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
You mean nuke them ? When over 80% of the population are ethnic Russians. Crimea was only given over to the Ukraine in 1954 simply to increase the "Russian" population in Ukraine.
You should only worry about the Tatars who are just innocent victims every time.
I was using humour to suggest that a military response to the Crimean crisis was not appropriate as likely to lead to escalation and potentially nuclear escalation. Sanctions are fine.
Russian backed separitists in sovereign countries Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine have a common theme. Putin is a leader with form. Trump likes him.
Even Goldwater and McGovern won at least a state despite losing by over 20% and Trump is nowhere near that level of deficit. He is bound to win South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Wyoming and Idaho regardless of what happens
A Clinton landslide would see South Carolina fall and in doing so give her a clean sweep of the east coast with Georgia and North Carolina linking up and giving Trump some of the South and Mid West :
Mr. Thompson, there was plenty of time, and it's an obvious and relevant piece of information to report. There was time to report the Belgian PM was flying home from holiday, after all.
Saying it is 'thought' to be terrorism and not including information most people would regard as rather confirming that is not accurate reporting.
Surely part of the problem is the classical definition of terrorism does not really fit these lone, self-radicalised nutters. If the next mass-murderer has been armed and trained by ISIL, that's clearly terrorism; if it is an isolated group that has planned an outrage, such as the Glasgow airport would-be bombers, that is also terrorism, but if it is just some loser who on the spur of the moment grabs a kitchen knife and rushes out into the street, then definitions are less clear.
There's not really a precedent. During "the troubles" it was only the terrorist organisations that had guns and bombs, and even where new ones formed, they still had an organisational structure complete with a PR department to issue warnings and claim responsibility (giving a pre-arranged code word). There weren't second-generation Irish immigrants having a rush of blood and mowing down bus queues in the name of a united Ireland.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
You mean nuke them ? When over 80% of the population are ethnic Russians. Crimea was only given over to the Ukraine in 1954 simply to increase the "Russian" population in Ukraine.
You should only worry about the Tatars who are just innocent victims every time.
I was using humour to suggest that a military response to the Crimean crisis was not appropriate as likely to lead to escalation and potentially nuclear escalation. Sanctions are fine.
Russian backed separitists in sovereign countries Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine have a common theme. Putin is a leader with form. Trump likes him.
Sorry ! I should have realised. You are not a head-banger like many here.
Mr. L, I agree that's a problem, but it's one of prevention rather than reporting. There's a unified, if utterly deranged, ideology behind the attacks.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
You mean nuke them ? When over 80% of the population are ethnic Russians. Crimea was only given over to the Ukraine in 1954 simply to increase the "Russian" population in Ukraine.
You should only worry about the Tatars who are just innocent victims every time.
I was using humour to suggest that a military response to the Crimean crisis was not appropriate as likely to lead to escalation and potentially nuclear escalation. Sanctions are fine.
Russian backed separitists in sovereign countries Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine have a common theme. Putin is a leader with form. Trump likes him.
If only the UK government, starting with Wilson before UDI had been prepared to intervene militarily in Rhodesia/zimbabwe ike Putin has stood up for ethnic russians in former USSR states, we might have avoided a lot of misery.
If Putin and Russia are so bad, why didn't Obama do something when Russia annexed Crimea?
What specific something do you have in mind?
Send in the troops. I'm not an apologist for Putin and Russia, but I find it galling when the likes of Obama and Clinton play the Russia card yet they themselves have appeased the Russians. It was the same with Syria and chemical weapons.
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Can any of our military-minded posters tell us what would have been involved in dislodging the Russian army from Crimea?
We might have finally found a use for the Trident subs.
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
You mean nuke them ? When over 80% of the population are ethnic Russians. Crimea was only given over to the Ukraine in 1954 simply to increase the "Russian" population in Ukraine.
You should only worry about the Tatars who are just innocent victims every time.
I was using humour to suggest that a military response to the Crimean crisis was not appropriate as likely to lead to escalation and potentially nuclear escalation. Sanctions are fine.
Russian backed separitists in sovereign countries Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine have a common theme. Putin is a leader with form. Trump likes him.
If only the UK government, starting with Wilson before UDI had been prepared to intervene militarily in Rhodesia/zimbabwe ike Putin has stood up for ethnic russians in former USSR states, we might have avoided a lot of misery.
Are you suggesting that we should have militarily deposed the regime of Ian Smith or reinforced it? The latter would have been closer to Putins support for ethnic Russians.
Trump's mutual support for Putin is also closely linked with the backing for Trump in Russia, according to Yougov Russia is the only one of the G20 nations outside the US where Trump would beat Hillary Clinton and his lead in Russia, 21%, is far higher than he has ever got in the UShttps://twitter.com/amolrajan/status/758968251355271168
Ponder this too. The turnout at the last 4 presidential elections was.
2012. 57.5% 2008. 62.3% 2004. 60.4% 2000. 54.2%
If a quarter of those non voters come out of the woodwork and vote Trump then Hillary is toast.
This is why I'm a little wary of betting too much on the US election. It not impossible that, for all the screaming about him in the media and at best apathy from Establishment Republicans, Trump is quietly building up a coalition of the dissatisfied big enough to win the election.
Mr. Surbiton, reporting that the Belgians think it's terror-related without mentioning the bloke was shouting 'Allahu Akbar' is like reporting they think an attack is Nazi-related without mentioning the bloke had a swastika armband and was wearing an Iron Cross.
Also, if you don't think there's an issue with partial reporting or a deliberate effort to distort or hide the truth from the public after the Rotherham disgrace then I'd invite you to reconsider whether that's really the case. Having a media we can trust it's an optional extra for a functioning society, it's essential.
That is not the same as having a media which says what we want it to say however. Which is really what you mean here.
Article doesn't say where they got the rockets, or if their plan was viable, but clearly in some parts of the world these things are not as difficult to get hold of as they should be.
Mr. Felix, the media didn't report the Munich shooter shouting 'Allahu Akbar' and stuck with the loner/mental illness line. The mental illness line was deployed for the Russell Square murderer, though it's now thought increasingly likely he was another terrorist [now it's faded from being front and centre news].
Now there's a report of an attack which would appear to be a slam-dunk case of terrorism being reported as 'thought of' being terrorism. If the chap hadn't actually shouted anything, I suspect it'd likely be reported as mental illness.
Comments
I find it had to believe that Hillary doesn’t know the answer to her own a smear campaign.
Ladbrokes are offering 6\1 that he gets replaced.
At Betfair, Paul Ryan can be backed at 100, Kasich at 620, Pence at 870, Bush, Cruz and Rubio each at 1000., and Johnson at 210.
Congresswoman Karen Bass (California, Dem) has started a petition (with hashtag #DiagnoseTrump) calling on "mental health professionals" to urge the Republican party to "conduct an evaluation" of Trump's mental health.
She means well, but she should have asked me to write the copy; I'd have written it much better.
It's possible that this could hurt Trump's chances a lot, even finish them. He wields his bravado skilfully, and it's been a strength not a weakness, but his lack of self-control is another matter.
The medical report on himself that Trump has released, signed by a real medic, reads almost like a parody.
"Mr Trump has had a recent complete medical examination that showed only positive results"
Well that's a relief. His heart rate wasn't negative, then.
"Actually, his blood pressure, 110/65, and laboratory test results were astonishingly excellent"
I'm not making this up. Those are quotes from the signed statement by Harold Bornstein - a medic who says he has been Trump's personal physician for 35 years - published by Donald Trump himself on his website. The statement is heads "To Whom My Concern" (sic). It ends
"If elected, Mr Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency".
Being able to state something without equivocation doesn't make it true, even if you're a quack. It doesn't even make it sensible.
Starting a sentence with "Actually", followed by a comma - I wonder how often Trump himself does that in his books?
June Bamber
Nevill Bamber
Sheila Caffell
Daniel Caffell
Nicholas Caffell
Bit like “Tell Sid!"
Clinton 50 .. Trump 42 - RV
Clinton 51 .. Trump 44 - LV
http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1180a1The2016Election.pdf
I can't imagine.
There was an article about two weeks ago in the Christian Science Monitor about how Michael Dukakis spends his days wandering the streets of Boston in a mildly disheveled state, picking up litter and tossing it into the nearest garbage can. Sometime this morning, as he performs this particular civic duty, haunted by visions of Willie Horton, he will stop, pump his fist victoriously in the air once, and not know why….
I don't have a problem with a non-interventionist foreign policy. I have a real problem with a virtue signalling foreign policy.
Interesting to see a explanation of Moniker's reasoning.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18287223
Would you really have sent in the troops?
He stands up for Russian interests, not those of someone else. Trump regards himself as an American nationalist standing up for American interests - that's his brand. So he regards Putin as being like-minded, and as long as it doesn't clash with his own and American interests, he's OK.
You may not agree with Trump (and I don't), but you don't need to bring in conspiracy theories. You can leave that to Hillary.
Clinton 81.9 .. Trump 18.1 - Polls Only
Clinton 75.0 .. Trump 24.9 - Polls Plus
Clinton 90.7 .. Trump 9.2 - Nowcast
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#now
This dismal candidate, Mrs Clinton, thought her husband's bimbo eruption with Miss Lewinsky was part of a " vast right-wing conspiracy ". A kook.
The fact I've been rubbish at the race weekend bets [those offered in my regular pieces] makes the wait easier to bear. It's irksome when I'm doing pretty well, like in 2012, because it disrupts a good run.
"He attacked Cameron for cronyism for producing a resignation honours list. Yet he had lobbied for his own crony to appear on the list. He told journalists that Chakrabarti was ‘fiercely independent’. But she wasn’t, and he knew she wasn’t. Because if she had been, she would have turned down his offer of a peerage out of hand.
But Corbyn is not alone in his duplicity. To listen to some of her defenders, you would think Chakrabarti was some innocent dupe who had just rolled into Westminster on the back of a turnip truck. Instead of what she is, which is just another sanctimonious, self-righteous, Left-wing moraliser who adopts ‘do as I say, not as I do’ as their rallying cry."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3727401/DAN-HODGES-Arise-Lady-Chakrabarti-poster-girl-squalid-hypocrisy.html#ixzz4GcxpPuYY
Sanctions have been reasonably effective, and are as far as action can reasonably go.
https://twitter.com/cosentino/status/266042007758200832/photo/1
You should only worry about the Tatars who are just innocent victims every time.
Also, if you don't think there's an issue with partial reporting or a deliberate effort to distort or hide the truth from the public after the Rotherham disgrace then I'd invite you to reconsider whether that's really the case. Having a media we can trust it's an optional extra for a functioning society, it's essential.
Interesting. How quickly the idea that running your own affairs = greater prosperity is taking root.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/06/treasury-looks-at-quitting-the-single-market-as-city-rejects-nor/
The wife of the murdered fencing team leader fought for 20yrs to get details of the police operations/negotiations with Palestinians. The German authorities pretended they didn't have any records...then someone leaked a batch to her. She finally secured several thousand pages of evidence showing the full horror of it all.
It all sounds so incredibly reminiscent of a culture of cover-up re Cologne et al.
The most depressing part of the whole docu was that it's taken 43yrs for the Germans to recognise the 12 murdered with a memorial. And they've never been honoured/mentioned at any Olympics - it'd spoil the atmosphere/not appropriate/blah blah handwaving.
Well worth watching.
If you were saying it is not terrorism related (like after the recent London stabbings) while not mentioning Allahu Akhbar etc then that would be duplicitous.
Oscar Pistorius has been treated at a private hospital in Pretoria after suffering injuries in jail.
Saying it is 'thought' to be terrorism and not including information most people would regard as rather confirming that is not accurate reporting.
I'd like Gary Johnson to win. He won't, of course, but that leads me to wonder how much of his support is unhappy Republicans who will grit their teeth and vote Trump when it comes to it. That said some of them would probably rather have Clinton than him win anyway.
Trump is your man. Deal with it.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/tim-kaine-rust-belt-voters-trump-226747
It's indicative of the parlous state of US politics that it's come down to a choice between two deeply unpleasant characters, but there it is. America is screaming out for a change, but only ever seems to get offered more of the same.
Bit like us, really !
Out of interest which of the US pollsters work to the same standards as our own?
The problem I see is that Trump is not a normal Republican candidate so as with the referendum it makes it difficult to use past demographic data as I suspect Trump will attract a different demographic to the previous GOP candidates along with a whole slew of people who haven't bothered to vote for ages.
Russian backed separitists in sovereign countries Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine have a common theme. Putin is a leader with form. Trump likes him.
http://www.270towin.com/
There's not really a precedent. During "the troubles" it was only the terrorist organisations that had guns and bombs, and even where new ones formed, they still had an organisational structure complete with a PR department to issue warnings and claim responsibility (giving a pre-arranged code word). There weren't second-generation Irish immigrants having a rush of blood and mowing down bus queues in the name of a united Ireland.
2012. 57.5%
2008. 62.3%
2004. 60.4%
2000. 54.2%
If a quarter of those non voters come out of the woodwork and vote Trump then Hillary is toast.
We play each other in football this afternoon.
Wow, apparently were planning a rocket attack from an offshore Indonesian island.
Article doesn't say where they got the rockets, or if their plan was viable, but clearly in some parts of the world these things are not as difficult to get hold of as they should be.
Now there's a report of an attack which would appear to be a slam-dunk case of terrorism being reported as 'thought of' being terrorism. If the chap hadn't actually shouted anything, I suspect it'd likely be reported as mental illness.
I hope you're right. I suspect you're not.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/06/you-dont-need-to-settle-for-the-future-the-tories-are-creating/