Mr. Betting, Lib Dems don't need to win Witney. A good second would be a significant positive step.
A second is a pass. A first lifts them into being contenders and attractive to MPs to defect to.
The last thing the Lib Dems need is for Labour MPs to defect to them and be turned into Labour Lite.
They are having enough difficulty getting their liberal message over as it is.
Disagree. A single MP defection would be a huge PR coup, make them look like winners / big players again, and get some good press. In many ways a single defection would be more valuable than a significant number.
I also don't get the excitement about Witney; the Lib Dems are clearly taking it seriously, and resourcing it heavily. But it's a fundamentally Tory seat without the incumbent having left in shame (maybe debatable!) and there's a decent Labour presence in the constituency including four councillors. So I don't see second place as a given at all.
Has Carswell been beneficial for UKIP or diluted their message?
I'd argue he's one of the sharpest thinkers in UKIP, and although we will never agree on the EU, he's one of the best speakers on democracy and power I've heard. He's a natural maverick rather than leader though. I'd say that overall having an MP with no trace of scandal who has a different perspective from the leadership is a positive. But I'm sure fans of Nigel will think differently.
Words are magic. Most of the British political establishment is signally that we're leaving the Single Market as the inevitable consequence of the anti immigration event. But no one is yet saying it out loud in clear words because words are magic. It's good psychology as the numerous Kubler-Ross jibes on here highlight but curiously don't understand. The question is when and in what context May says the spell out loud and on record. It will be one of the those moment where we all go ' well we knew that ' but it will be shocking. Shocking because more or less the entire purpose of the modern British state is *not* do this sort of thing. Vulgar outbursts of popular sovereignty in support of abstract philosophy which conflict with free trade are , well, European. So Dean is right. We're heading for a huge system shock. But I feel completely wrong about the ability of the destroyed Lib Dems to channel the flow.
If (when) we leave the Single Market a lot of companies will open operations in countries that remain within the Single Market. They will create jobs and invest in those countries rather than in the UK. That is exactly what we will do. We will retain our UK office and it will remain our HQ, but all the work we do with and in the EU that we currently do from the UK will be done from the new office instead. That is the challenge the government faces: it not only loses investment and jobs, but it also sees its income reduce at a time when the working population is not getting smaller as a proportion of the overall population. Obviously, morons like the Three Amigos do not understand this, or do not think it is important, but I imagine it is keeping both the PM and the CoE up at night with worry.
Do you sell into other countries around the world, e.g. the US and Australia?
In the First Round of the LR Primaries, Sarkozy has narrowed the gap. It's now 37 for Juppe, and 33 for Sarkozy, although Juppe retains a big lead in the Second Round.
In the First Round of the LR Primaries, Sarkozy has narrowed the gap. It's now 37 for Juppe, and 33 for Sarkozy, although Juppe retains a big lead in the Second Round.
When's the next vote? I assume it's not instant runoff.
Disagree. A single MP defection would be a huge PR coup, make them look like winners / big players again, and get some good press. In many ways a single defection would be more valuable than a significant number.
I also don't get the excitement about Witney; the Lib Dems are clearly taking it seriously, and resourcing it heavily. But it's a fundamentally Tory seat without the incumbent having left in shame (maybe debatable!) and there's a decent Labour presence in the constituency including four councillors. So I don't see second place as a given at all.
It's the kind of seat the LDs have won or done very well in at a by-election. The figures look unpromising at best but the Party couldn't afford to duck it like some of the strong Labour seats of recent times.
I thought the attack was years ago? He would scarcely be deliberately alienating the overweight vote now (and not when his own bmi is borderline obese) surely?
Clinton brought her up at the end of the debate and Trump went mentalist. And then kept talking about her the next day - watch the Fox and Friends hosts faces as Trump talks here
Is there anyone who doesn't want a general election in May 2017?
Isn't a French presidential election and German federal elections enough for 2017? And why should I spend 60 days looking at 60 youGov polls all telling me the same (wrong) information?
In truth we've been spoilt the last couple of years.
We have the first rounds of the Socialist and Les Republicains coming up too. LR is in November; the Socialists on 22 January. Will Macron stand? Will Hollande fight off Valls? Will Juppe beat Sarkozy?
Given France's system I'm fascinated by the idea that a Trump-style non politician could step in and catapult themselves to the Presidency.
''Obviously, morons like the Three Amigos do not understand this, or do not think it is important, but I imagine it is keeping both the PM and the CoE up at night with worry. ''
This has been threatened from day one, and yet the number of companies doing it after three months has been precisely zero, whilst at the same time the UK gets vote of confidence after vote of confidence from companies like Aldi and Apple.
Is there anyone who doesn't want a general election in May 2017?
Isn't a French presidential election and German federal elections enough for 2017? And why should I spend 60 days looking at 60 youGov polls all telling me the same (wrong) information?
In truth we've been spoilt the last couple of years.
We have the first rounds of the Socialist and Les Republicains coming up too. LR is in November; the Socialists on 22 January. Will Macron stand? Will Hollande fight off Valls? Will Juppe beat Sarkozy?
Given France's system I'm fascinated by the idea that a Trump-style non politician could step in and catapult themselves to the Presidency.
Allegedly Macron is considering running as an Independent, rather than for the Socialist nomination.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Mr. Betting, Lib Dems don't need to win Witney. A good second would be a significant positive step.
A second is a pass. A first lifts them into being contenders and attractive to MPs to defect to.
The last thing the Lib Dems need is for Labour MPs to defect to them and be turned into Labour Lite.
They are having enough difficulty getting their liberal message over as it is.
Disagree. A single MP defection would be a huge PR coup, make them look like winners / big players again, and get some good press. In many ways a single defection would be more valuable than a significant number.
I also don't get the excitement about Witney; the Lib Dems are clearly taking it seriously, and resourcing it heavily. But it's a fundamentally Tory seat without the incumbent having left in shame (maybe debatable!) and there's a decent Labour presence in the constituency including four councillors. So I don't see second place as a given at all.
Has Carswell been beneficial for UKIP or diluted their message?
I'd argue he's one of the sharpest thinkers in UKIP, and although we will never agree on the EU, he's one of the best speakers on democracy and power I've heard. He's a natural maverick rather than leader though. I'd say that overall having an MP with no trace of scandal who has a different perspective from the leadership is a positive. But I'm sure fans of Nigel will think differently.
It seems to me that there are higher hurdles about than the one in that first observation
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I have 7 daily and weekly tracking polls in that average, and I've included an 8th just in case 1 of the 7 ceases.
It's very stable, individual outliers are largerly cancelled out, and it's very fast, it tends to lead the RCP average by about a week.
I used a similar one in 2012 and I was very satisfied with it, it reacted to all the events and debates in the race and called the race for Obama by 50 to 47.5 for Romney, very close to the real result.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
“I think the leadership election is having a fantastically negative effect across the whole country and across the whole UK and it would be surprising if Wales was in any way immune to that. I’ve said previously I think the election of Jeremy Corbyn would be an absolute electoral disaster for Labour in Wales as much as elsewhere.
“I don’t believe that those people who are disillusioned with the party system and who turned to Ukip are going to be turned back to Labour by somebody who is long on rhetoric but short on action.”
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
I think what would be interesting to know is when the polls swing between Clinton and Trump, what demographics are causing this swing.
didnt one of the trump fans defend breitbart as 'slightly right wing rather than white nationalist' recently?
Might help to quote the line in context: Sikorski desperately wanted to replace Baroness Catherine Ashton as EU foreign affairs spokesman. This bid died with the exposure of the Civic Platform corruption. This turn of events ended Applebaum’s dream of being Poland’s first Jewish-American first lady. And hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
The main difference between my average and 538's is quite simple, I take all of those tracking polls and match them with the day both candidates where tied on the RCP average (in this case the Conventions).
Example, if Reuters had Hillary up by 15 and the LA Times one had Trump up by 7 on the same day the RCP average had them exactly tied then I correct them and I play it out from there on.
In theory because I have conformed them all to that day on the RCP average it should follow the RCP average, and it does indeed tend to follow it but about a week faster than the RCP one, because it doesn't include monthly surveys.
538 is simply taking the polls and correcting them to their own tastes, without using a reference point like I do.
didnt one of the trump fans defend breitbart as 'slightly right wing rather than white nationalist' recently?
Might help to quote the line in context: Sikorski desperately wanted to replace Baroness Catherine Ashton as EU foreign affairs spokesman. This bid died with the exposure of the Civic Platform corruption. This turn of events ended Applebaum’s dream of being Poland’s first Jewish-American first lady. And hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned.
still bad in context. he is bringing up her jewishness!
Its interesting that despite being given top billing by the BBC the stories about Corbyn's speech are 8 and 9 on the most popular behind such burning stories as the man who caught 19 rats in his house in 24 hours and the fact that the "fake sheik" chose not to give evidence. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
It is another not particularly scientific indicator that the people of the UK have made up their minds about him and are frankly just not interested.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
I think what would be interesting to know is when the polls swing between Clinton and Trump, what demographics are causing this swing.
there have been 4 scientific post debate polls with clinton as winning, and the morning consult poll with a 4 point swing
need more polls to see if that swing is uniform, but its clear clinton won
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
I'll wait for Friday, but the Morning Consult poll doesn't surprise me, Romney got a similar boost when he won the first debate in 2012.
If Hillary gets a similar one then the Presidency is beyond reach for Trump, I'm fascinated that he did no serious preparation for the most important moment in his life.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
I think what would be interesting to know is when the polls swing between Clinton and Trump, what demographics are causing this swing.
there have been 4 scientific post debate polls with clinton as winning, and the morning consult poll with a 4 point swing
need more polls to see if that swing is uniform, but its clear clinton won
You miss my point. I don't doubt any of that, anybody with half a brain could see Clinton won the debate (albeit the standard was incredibly low).
My point was I would be interested to know what demographic is shifting the needle week to week. We know that on both sides there are certain demographics that ain't shifting no matter what, so who are "undecided" and changing their minds.
I don't know the answer to this and would like to know.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
I think what would be interesting to know is when the polls swing between Clinton and Trump, what demographics are causing this swing.
there have been 4 scientific post debate polls with clinton as winning, and the morning consult poll with a 4 point swing
need more polls to see if that swing is uniform, but its clear clinton won
Scientific, but not balanced.
"Post-debate surveys like CNN’s aren’t always popular with poll mavens, in part because the universe of debate-watchers may not match the electorate overall. The voters in CNN’s poll were Democratic-leaning by a net of 15 percentage points, for instance, a considerably wider advantage than Democrats are likely to enjoy on Election Day."
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
He has the advantage of the town hall format next time, with the highest ranked questions being particularly good for him. It remains to be seen whether the broadcaster actually uses the highest ranked questions, however.
didnt one of the trump fans defend breitbart as 'slightly right wing rather than white nationalist' recently?
Might help to quote the line in context: Sikorski desperately wanted to replace Baroness Catherine Ashton as EU foreign affairs spokesman. This bid died with the exposure of the Civic Platform corruption. This turn of events ended Applebaum’s dream of being Poland’s first Jewish-American first lady. And hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned.
still bad in context. he is bringing up her jewishness!
And her Polishness, and her Americanness. Actual anti-semites don't bother with those.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
i dont think clinton was top of her game. Trump was just terrible and she was much better!
less people will watch the other two debates so lesser impact
i can see the town hall going really badly for trump. clinton may be a bit stiff. However, if trump doesnt lile a question, he could lose it with a member of the public on national tv. it could be the khans all over again times 10
Its interesting that despite being given top billing by the BBC the stories about Corbyn's speech are 8 and 9 on the most popular behind such burning stories as the man who caught 19 rats in his house in 24 hours and the fact that the "fake sheik" chose not to give evidence. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
It is another not particularly scientific indicator that the people of the UK have made up their minds about him and are frankly just not interested.
It may however also mean that some of the horrific stuff about him and his acolytes doesn't reach the general public i.e. they think of him as well-meaning but incompetent rather than the malign force he really is. (IMO obviously).
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
Big mistake, the first debate always gets the biggest audience, even if Trump gets a win in the other two he will gain less than what Hillary got in the first one.
Trump should listen to his lawyers, after all Hillary is a lawyer, he also needs acting lessons big time.
It's no coincidence that Lawyers (every President since WW2 except Eisenhower and Reagan was a lawyer) and Actors (like Reagan) are most succesful in politics, it's their vocation to deceive people whether it's the audience or the jury.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
i dont think clinton was top of her game. Trump was just terrible and she was much better!
less people will watch the other two debates so lesser impact
i can see the town hall going really badly for trump. clinton may be a bit stiff. However, if trump doesnt lile a question, he could lose it with a member of the public on national tv. it could be the khans all over again times 10
I suspect he's not mad enough to do that. There is a huge difference between insulting someone when they aren't there and when they are.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
Big mistake, the first debate always gets the biggest audience, even if Trump gets a win in the other two he will gain less than what Hillary got in the first one.
Trump should listen to his lawyers, after all Hillary is a lawyer, he also needs acting lessons big time.
It's no coincidence that Lawyers (every President since WW2 except Eisenhower and Reagan) and Actors (like Reagan) are most succesful in politics, it's their vocation to deceive people whether it's the audience or the jury.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
Donald Trump's emotional message is I am for you and I am with you. It's about identity. Hillary Clinton can't match that. I expect to see that message pumped out ad infinitum. The idea that this scion of New York wealth and privilege can present himself as the Blue Collar President is astonishing to me, but there you go.
There was a piece I read somewhere that evangelicals are breaking almost totally for Trump. In my experience evangelicals tend to place a lot of emphasis on politeness and character so you might expect them to be a bit doubtful about him.
I sincerely hope this lady is wrong otherwise I fear the effects on the younger generation are going to be horrendous and, long-term, the social and economic effects are going to be even worse.
I think we are heading back to the area of a Hillary landslide victory.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
I am waiting to see more polling from good pollsters. We've had one go strongly to Hillary since the debate, and the LA Times tracker has drifted back towards Trump.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
I think what would be interesting to know is when the polls swing between Clinton and Trump, what demographics are causing this swing.
there have been 4 scientific post debate polls with clinton as winning, and the morning consult poll with a 4 point swing
need more polls to see if that swing is uniform, but its clear clinton won
You miss my point. I don't doubt any of that, anybody with half a brain could see Clinton won the debate (albeit the standard was incredibly low).
My point was I would be interested to know what demographic is shifting the needle week to week. We know that on both sides there are certain demographics that ain't shifting no matter what, so who are "undecided" and changing their minds.
I don't know the answer to this and would like to know.
ah fair question
from what i can see, it seems like college educated whites who normally vote republican and millenials.
trump could get the college educated whites, but the debate and way he acted after makes that a lot harder. They wont vote for someone they think is dangerous
millenials could go clinton or third party. i think michelle obama and bernie helping her with them will help get them onside.
id be interested if trumps 'i dont pay taxes, made money in the housing crisis and stiffed contractors' will effect his standing with the white working classes.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
i dont think clinton was top of her game. Trump was just terrible and she was much better!
less people will watch the other two debates so lesser impact
i can see the town hall going really badly for trump. clinton may be a bit stiff. However, if trump doesnt lile a question, he could lose it with a member of the public on national tv. it could be the khans all over again times 10
I suspect he's not mad enough to do that. There is a huge difference between insulting someone when they aren't there and when they are.
he can look bored, annoyed or dismissive though and attack them afterwards on fox. especially if its a woman or minority.
Its interesting that despite being given top billing by the BBC the stories about Corbyn's speech are 8 and 9 on the most popular behind such burning stories as the man who caught 19 rats in his house in 24 hours and the fact that the "fake sheik" chose not to give evidence. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
It is another not particularly scientific indicator that the people of the UK have made up their minds about him and are frankly just not interested.
Guilty as charged re reading the story about rats.
I sincerely hope this lady is wrong otherwise I fear the effects on the younger generation are going to be horrendous and, long-term, the social and economic effects are going to be even worse.
However their post debate samples is only 1/7th of their total, we would know by Friday better.
i suspect it will an average of a 2% increase for clinton. her baseline lead has been between 2-3%, which would be enough to win if that holds till nov
“I think the leadership election is having a fantastically negative effect across the whole country and across the whole UK and it would be surprising if Wales was in any way immune to that. I’ve said previously I think the election of Jeremy Corbyn would be an absolute electoral disaster for Labour in Wales as much as elsewhere.
“I don’t believe that those people who are disillusioned with the party system and who turned to Ukip are going to be turned back to Labour by somebody who is long on rhetoric but short on action.”
Presumably Corbyn's NEC appointees are more positive about him, just like the Unite appointees are.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
Big mistake, the first debate always gets the biggest audience, even if Trump gets a win in the other two he will gain less than what Hillary got in the first one.
Trump should listen to his lawyers, after all Hillary is a lawyer, he also needs acting lessons big time.
It's no coincidence that Lawyers (every President since WW2 except Eisenhower and Reagan) and Actors (like Reagan) are most succesful in politics, it's their vocation to deceive people whether it's the audience or the jury.
I thought Clinton's was to bore people to death
actually in a way it is her strategy- to say look i'm a safe pair of hands compared to this nutcase.
I sincerely hope this lady is wrong otherwise I fear the effects on the younger generation are going to be horrendous and, long-term, the social and economic effects are going to be even worse.
''Obviously, morons like the Three Amigos do not understand this, or do not think it is important, but I imagine it is keeping both the PM and the CoE up at night with worry. ''
This has been threatened from day one, and yet the number of companies doing it after three months has been precisely zero, whilst at the same time the UK gets vote of confidence after vote of confidence from companies like Aldi and Apple.
That's because we are still a part of the single market and may remain a part of it, to all intents and purposes.
It will make no difference to companies that want to sell to the UK market or which already have offices inside the single market. It's the companies that use the UK as their base for sales into the single market that will be watching and waiting.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
i dont think clinton was top of her game. Trump was just terrible and she was much better!
less people will watch the other two debates so lesser impact
i can see the town hall going really badly for trump. clinton may be a bit stiff. However, if trump doesnt lile a question, he could lose it with a member of the public on national tv. it could be the khans all over again times 10
I suspect he's not mad enough to do that. There is a huge difference between insulting someone when they aren't there and when they are.
Trump erroneously corrected a questioner during the commander in chief forum.
Trump's lucky he has two more goes. We now have a baseline for how Trump and Clinton interact together on the same stage. Hillary was clearly on top of her game last time whereas he has room for improvement so the narrative could play to his advantage.
i dont think clinton was top of her game. Trump was just terrible and she was much better!
less people will watch the other two debates so lesser impact
i can see the town hall going really badly for trump. clinton may be a bit stiff. However, if trump doesnt lile a question, he could lose it with a member of the public on national tv. it could be the khans all over again times 10
I suspect he's not mad enough to do that. There is a huge difference between insulting someone when they aren't there and when they are.
Trump erroneously corrected a questioner during the commander in chief forum.
Words are magic. Most of the British political establishment is signally that we're leaving the Single Market as the inevitable consequence of the anti immigration event. But no one is yet saying it out loud in clear words because words are magic. It's good psychology as the numerous Kubler-Ross jibes on here highlight but curiously don't understand. The question is when and in what context May says the spell out loud and on record. It will be one of the those moment where we all go ' well we knew that ' but it will be shocking. Shocking because more or less the entire purpose of the modern British state is *not* do this sort of thing. Vulgar outbursts of popular sovereignty in support of abstract philosophy which conflict with free trade are , well, European. So Dean is right. We're heading for a huge system shock. But I feel completely wrong about the ability of the destroyed Lib Dems to channel the flow.
If (when) we leave the Single Market a lot of companies will open operations in countries that remain within the Single Market. They will create jobs and invest in those countries rather than in the UK. That is exactly what we will do. We will retain our UK office and it will remain our HQ, but all the work we do with and in the EU that we currently do from the UK will be done from the new office instead. That is the challenge the government faces: it not only loses investment and jobs, but it also sees its income reduce at a time when the working population is not getting smaller as a proportion of the overall population. Obviously, morons like the Three Amigos do not understand this, or do not think it is important, but I imagine it is keeping both the PM and the CoE up at night with worry.
Do you sell into other countries around the world, e.g. the US and Australia?
Do you have offices in those countries?
We have an office in Hong Kong and are looking at opening one in the US. Leaving the single market means we will incur additional costs that we do not incur now. So we have decided it will be best for us not to leave the single market.
I sincerely hope this lady is wrong otherwise I fear the effects on the younger generation are going to be horrendous and, long-term, the social and economic effects are going to be even worse.
Well 0% interest rates and the BoE buying up bonds means that saving, for the long term especially, is going to be a fruitless exercise. Without the effect of compound interest pensions are going to be unaffordable for the majority. On the happy side those that already have assets are going to see them increase in value, those that haven't are going to struggle to buy them.
If the lady is correct, that is one big change to the post war settlement.
I sincerely hope this lady is wrong otherwise I fear the effects on the younger generation are going to be horrendous and, long-term, the social and economic effects are going to be even worse.
Given the source, perhaps Gideon will see this as a compliment!
"George Osborne will be remembered as a "particularly inept" chancellor whose pursuit of austerity in an attempt to rein in Britain's deficit was doomed to failure, according to Yanis Varoufakis."
"I would tell the British, you've gone out, but we have a new treaty on the table so you have an opportunity to vote again," Mr Sarkozy is cited as saying by the Financial Times
As always keep voting until you come up with the right answer.
''Obviously, morons like the Three Amigos do not understand this, or do not think it is important, but I imagine it is keeping both the PM and the CoE up at night with worry. ''
This has been threatened from day one, and yet the number of companies doing it after three months has been precisely zero, whilst at the same time the UK gets vote of confidence after vote of confidence from companies like Aldi and Apple.
That's because we are still a part of the single market and may remain a part of it, to all intents and purposes.
It will make no difference to companies that want to sell to the UK market or which already have offices inside the single market. It's the companies that use the UK as their base for sales into the single market that will be watching and waiting.
''Obviously, morons like the Three Amigos do not understand this, or do not think it is important, but I imagine it is keeping both the PM and the CoE up at night with worry. ''
This has been threatened from day one, and yet the number of companies doing it after three months has been precisely zero, whilst at the same time the UK gets vote of confidence after vote of confidence from companies like Aldi and Apple.
That's because we are still a part of the single market and may remain a part of it, to all intents and purposes.
It will make no difference to companies that want to sell to the UK market or which already have offices inside the single market. It's the companies that use the UK as their base for sales into the single market that will be watching and waiting.
Like Honda?
Or Apple.
Just to remind, they are building a 3,000 person office despite only having around a thousand office based workers in the UK currently. No one invests money on space they aren't going to use.
Given the source, perhaps Gideon will see this as a compliment!
"George Osborne will be remembered as a "particularly inept" chancellor whose pursuit of austerity in an attempt to rein in Britain's deficit was doomed to failure, according to Yanis Varoufakis."
I think now we are split between Osborne was a bad chancellor who failed on his own terms, or Osborne always knew he was spouting drivel in order to attack Labour.
Given the source, perhaps Gideon will see this as a compliment!
"George Osborne will be remembered as a "particularly inept" chancellor whose pursuit of austerity in an attempt to rein in Britain's deficit was doomed to failure, according to Yanis Varoufakis."
Although Varoufakis is a world expert on "doomed to failure"...
I sincerely hope this lady is wrong otherwise I fear the effects on the younger generation are going to be horrendous and, long-term, the social and economic effects are going to be even worse.
Possibly, Mr. Star, but the lady has been a Deputy Governor of the Bank of England and is about to go and lead the LSE where she will be responsible for training a whole new generation of economists.
Gawd, the BBC's online coverage on the US election is absolute drivel. They seem obsessed with this stupid frog meme thing, and have daily articles on the matter.
Its interesting that despite being given top billing by the BBC the stories about Corbyn's speech are 8 and 9 on the most popular behind such burning stories as the man who caught 19 rats in his house in 24 hours and the fact that the "fake sheik" chose not to give evidence. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
It is another not particularly scientific indicator that the people of the UK have made up their minds about him and are frankly just not interested.
It may however also mean that some of the horrific stuff about him and his acolytes doesn't reach the general public i.e. they think of him as well-meaning but incompetent rather than the malign force he really is. (IMO obviously).
Very likely. Most voters pay little attention to politics between elections.
The Tories will need to play heavily on his (and especially McDonnell's) extremist links during the GE campaign. A concentration on the £500bn spending commitment, open borders attitudes to immigration, land taxes on freehold property, unilateralism, cosying up to Russia and Iran, a return to 1970s trade union strife, and the word "socialism," would also be helpful.
It is imperative for the future welfare and security of the nation that Labour is electorally destroyed as thoroughly as possible. We can worry about where to find a credible Opposition later.
Gawd, the BBC's online coverage on the US election is absolute drivel. They seem obsessed with this stupid frog meme thing, and have daily articles on the matter.
And Skittles...another article today.
At least they have stopped with the daily articles on Fabric nightclub closing.
"I would tell the British, you've gone out, but we have a new treaty on the table so you have an opportunity to vote again," Mr Sarkozy is cited as saying by the Financial Times
As always keep voting until you come up with the right answer.
I rarely agree with you but this is a ridiculous intervention by Sarkozy. We have voted to LEAVE and the Prime Minister has already indicated she intends to instigate A50 negotiations early next year. While I suspect the 24 month timeframe could be stretched a little by both sides to accommodate the full process, I'm sure the Prime Minister would like us out of the EU in good time for the next General Election.
IF Sarkozy was proposing a new treaty as the basis for a re-entry to the EU - i.e: Britain could vote to rejoin the EU on these "special" terms rather than the normal terms involving the Euro and possibly Schengen, it would be of interest but we've voted to Leave so we have to Leave.
Leaving now doesn't rule out rejoining in the future - a future Government might wish to negotiate terms of re-entry to be put to the people in a referendum but the process instigated by the vote of June 23rd has to be seen through to its conclusion.
"I would tell the British, you've gone out, but we have a new treaty on the table so you have an opportunity to vote again," Mr Sarkozy is cited as saying by the Financial Times
As always keep voting until you come up with the right answer.
I rarely agree with you but this is a ridiculous intervention by Sarkozy. We have voted to LEAVE and the Prime Minister has already indicated she intends to instigate A50 negotiations early next year. While I suspect the 24 month timeframe could be stretched a little by both sides to accommodate the full process, I'm sure the Prime Minister would like us out of the EU in good time for the next General Election.
IF Sarkozy was proposing a new treaty as the basis for a re-entry to the EU - i.e: Britain could vote to rejoin the EU on these "special" terms rather than the normal terms involving the Euro and possibly Schengen, it would be of interest but we've voted to Leave so we have to Leave.
Leaving now doesn't rule out rejoining in the future - a future Government might wish to negotiate terms of re-entry to be put to the people in a referendum but the process instigated by the vote of June 23rd has to be seen through to its conclusion.
Leaving 'now' isn't on offer by anybody. It's a long drawn out process no matter what so if a new treaty might be on the agenda it's in our interests to take it seriously.
"I would tell the British, you've gone out, but we have a new treaty on the table so you have an opportunity to vote again," Mr Sarkozy is cited as saying by the Financial Times
As always keep voting until you come up with the right answer.
I rarely agree with you but this is a ridiculous intervention by Sarkozy. We have voted to LEAVE and the Prime Minister has already indicated she intends to instigate A50 negotiations early next year. While I suspect the 24 month timeframe could be stretched a little by both sides to accommodate the full process, I'm sure the Prime Minister would like us out of the EU in good time for the next General Election.
IF Sarkozy was proposing a new treaty as the basis for a re-entry to the EU - i.e: Britain could vote to rejoin the EU on these "special" terms rather than the normal terms involving the Euro and possibly Schengen, it would be of interest but we've voted to Leave so we have to Leave.
Leaving now doesn't rule out rejoining in the future - a future Government might wish to negotiate terms of re-entry to be put to the people in a referendum but the process instigated by the vote of June 23rd has to be seen through to its conclusion.
Leaving 'now' isn't on offer by anybody. It's a long drawn out process no matter what so if a new treaty might be on the agenda it's in our interests to take it seriously.
You never say never and should always* at least listen. But if they couldn't give Cameron a fig leaf, what are the chances of negotiating a new treaty which would be appealing to the UK?
Just to remind, they are building a 3,000 person office despite only having around a thousand office based workers in the UK currently. No one invests money on space they aren't going to use.
The UK is one of Apple's best overseas markets, they have higher marketshare here than more or less anywhere else in Europe. Apple has a lot of profitable business to do in the UK whether or not we are in the EU.
Comments
Do you sell into other countries around the world, e.g. the US and Australia?
Do you have offices in those countries?
Leffman is the Lib Dem candidate in Witney but what is the Leffman factor. good or bad?
Trump should never attack members of the public, he obviously has learned nothing from his summer problems.
This has been threatened from day one, and yet the number of companies doing it after three months has been precisely zero, whilst at the same time the UK gets vote of confidence after vote of confidence from companies like Aldi and Apple.
Hillary has already reached her all time high of 47% on my average daily tracking poll, Trump is still at around 43.5% but the debate plus the Miss Universe controversy will probably beat him back down to 40 where he was in early August.
Trump had a chance to become President, but no, he never wanted to prepare for the debate and he had to attack random people.
In 2015 the spread labour over libs was about 6,000. Wonder what it will be this time. Might be an interesting market...
Is it a Democratic bias in the polls which they are correcting, or are you not including some polls?
It's very stable, individual outliers are largerly cancelled out, and it's very fast, it tends to lead the RCP average by about a week.
I used a similar one in 2012 and I was very satisfied with it, it reacted to all the events and debates in the race and called the race for Obama by 50 to 47.5 for Romney, very close to the real result.
https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/781159659772186624
pm if you want the stake up front.
There is no doubt that on a debating level, Hillary won. But this is an emotional election. I have no idea who won that, because I am not in touch with the emotions that the Donald is appealing to. But that he does appeal to them in others in undeniable.
What we think of as an horrific performance by Trump may well not be viewed the same by the people to whom he appeals and some of the undecideds (who let's face it are undecided because they don't like Hillary).
“I think the leadership election is having a fantastically negative effect across the whole country and across the whole UK and it would be surprising if Wales was in any way immune to that. I’ve said previously I think the election of Jeremy Corbyn would be an absolute electoral disaster for Labour in Wales as much as elsewhere.
“I don’t believe that those people who are disillusioned with the party system and who turned to Ukip are going to be turned back to Labour by somebody who is long on rhetoric but short on action.”
Sikorski desperately wanted to replace Baroness Catherine Ashton as EU foreign affairs spokesman. This bid died with the exposure of the Civic Platform corruption. This turn of events ended Applebaum’s dream of being Poland’s first Jewish-American first lady. And hell hath no fury like a Polish, Jewish, American elitist scorned.
The main difference between my average and 538's is quite simple, I take all of those tracking polls and match them with the day both candidates where tied on the RCP average (in this case the Conventions).
Example, if Reuters had Hillary up by 15 and the LA Times one had Trump up by 7 on the same day the RCP average had them exactly tied then I correct them and I play it out from there on.
In theory because I have conformed them all to that day on the RCP average it should follow the RCP average, and it does indeed tend to follow it but about a week faster than the RCP one, because it doesn't include monthly surveys.
538 is simply taking the polls and correcting them to their own tastes, without using a reference point like I do.
It is another not particularly scientific indicator that the people of the UK have made up their minds about him and are frankly just not interested.
need more polls to see if that swing is uniform, but its clear clinton won
If Hillary gets a similar one then the Presidency is beyond reach for Trump, I'm fascinated that he did no serious preparation for the most important moment in his life.
My point was I would be interested to know what demographic is shifting the needle week to week. We know that on both sides there are certain demographics that ain't shifting no matter what, so who are "undecided" and changing their minds.
I don't know the answer to this and would like to know.
"Post-debate surveys like CNN’s aren’t always popular with poll mavens, in part because the universe of debate-watchers may not match the electorate overall. The voters in CNN’s poll were Democratic-leaning by a net of 15 percentage points, for instance, a considerably wider advantage than Democrats are likely to enjoy on Election Day."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-won-the-debate-which-means-shes-likely-to-gain-in-the-polls/
Then Romney got royally stuffed, lest we forget.
less people will watch the other two debates so lesser impact
i can see the town hall going really badly for trump. clinton may be a bit stiff. However, if trump doesnt lile a question, he could lose it with a member of the public on national tv. it could be the khans all over again times 10
Trump should listen to his lawyers, after all Hillary is a lawyer, he also needs acting lessons big time.
It's no coincidence that Lawyers (every President since WW2 except Eisenhower and Reagan was a lawyer) and Actors (like Reagan) are most succesful in politics, it's their vocation to deceive people whether it's the audience or the jury.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJmHW8JEWFs
Mr 619 I think you and Mr Speedy are looking at Trump through British eyes. Different country. They do things differently there.
There was a piece I read somewhere that evangelicals are breaking almost totally for Trump. In my experience evangelicals tend to place a lot of emphasis on politeness and character so you might expect them to be a bit doubtful about him.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/28/qe-is-here-forever-says-bank-of-england-deputy-governor/
from what i can see, it seems like college educated whites who normally vote republican and millenials.
trump could get the college educated whites, but the debate and way he acted after makes that a lot harder. They wont vote for someone they think is dangerous
millenials could go clinton or third party. i think michelle obama and bernie helping her with them will help get them onside.
id be interested if trumps 'i dont pay taxes, made money in the housing crisis and stiffed contractors' will effect his standing with the white working classes.
UPI has Hillary up half a point.
Gallup has Trump up a point.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/189299/presidential-election-2016-key-indicators.aspx?g_source=ELECTION_2016&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2016/09/28/UPICVoter-Hillary-Clinton-regains-slight-lead-in-first-post-debate-poll/8801475069632/
However their post debate samples is only 1/7th of their total, we would know by Friday better.
Seriously though, forever is a very long time.
Has she never thought that QE and zero rates are maybe some of the factors behind the stagnation ?
Has she ever looked at Japan ?
It's one of those days where I wish the government still had control over the BoE.
It will make no difference to companies that want to sell to the UK market or which already have offices inside the single market. It's the companies that use the UK as their base for sales into the single market that will be watching and waiting.
6 point swing to clinton, now leading by 6 in a two way. this was before the debate though
If the lady is correct, that is one big change to the post war settlement.
"George Osborne will be remembered as a "particularly inept" chancellor whose pursuit of austerity in an attempt to rein in Britain's deficit was doomed to failure, according to Yanis Varoufakis."
"I would tell the British, you've gone out, but we have a new treaty on the table so you have an opportunity to vote again," Mr Sarkozy is cited as saying by the Financial Times
As always keep voting until you come up with the right answer.
Just to remind, they are building a 3,000 person office despite only having around a thousand office based workers in the UK currently. No one invests money on space they aren't going to use.
The Tories will need to play heavily on his (and especially McDonnell's) extremist links during the GE campaign. A concentration on the £500bn spending commitment, open borders attitudes to immigration, land taxes on freehold property, unilateralism, cosying up to Russia and Iran, a return to 1970s trade union strife, and the word "socialism," would also be helpful.
It is imperative for the future welfare and security of the nation that Labour is electorally destroyed as thoroughly as possible. We can worry about where to find a credible Opposition later.
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/143/514/19f.jpg
At least they have stopped with the daily articles on Fabric nightclub closing.
IF Sarkozy was proposing a new treaty as the basis for a re-entry to the EU - i.e: Britain could vote to rejoin the EU on these "special" terms rather than the normal terms involving the Euro and possibly Schengen, it would be of interest but we've voted to Leave so we have to Leave.
Leaving now doesn't rule out rejoining in the future - a future Government might wish to negotiate terms of re-entry to be put to the people in a referendum but the process instigated by the vote of June 23rd has to be seen through to its conclusion.
How on earth did this person become deputy governor of the BofE...??
They need a f8cking clean out and soon, or they will do to our banking system what the ECB is doing to the Eurozone one. IE destroy it.
(* well, nearly always)
"If it's liquid, drink it. If it's solid, smoke it. If it's got a pulse, shag it. Everything else - chuck it in the back of the van..."
It allows victims/families of 9/11 to sue foreign governments complicit in the attack. Saudi Arabia is the chief target.