A bizarre conclusion seeing has Trump has comfortable polling leads in the state. It is one of the few swing states he is actually doing okay in.
I currently expect him to carry Ohio but lose the election, probably with Clinton scoring 300+ in the electoral college.
As a point of interest, were that to happen, it would be the first time a candidate has won Ohio but lost the election.
I posted it because Nate Silver had Trump winning Ohio, but that has changed recently as more polls have been done after the debate.
Nationally, yes, but I haven't seen any new OH polls that have Hillary ahead ––– I may have missed them however!
I don't think there have been any recent OH polls putting Hilary ahead. I expect 538 are giving Ohio to her, because you would assume that she'd win the State if she's about 4% ahead. That said, a 4% lead might see North Carolina going to Hilary, and Ohio to Trump, as current polling indicates.
Thanks, Sean – that would be my analysis too. I think differential demographics between the two states will likely see them falling different ways, were the national lead to remain roughly where it is.
Theresa May's calculation is that the red-in-tooth-and-claw free market economics of the 1980s, that worked so well then, might not be working quite so well now and Conservatives have to ditch unadulterated dogmatic worship of markets and lead reform of capitalism instead, where it has notably failed at the human level, if free market economics are to survive.
In this, I think she is correct.
Reforming the free market doesn't require the state to expand to a stage where it rivals the size of China or Scandinavian countries.
The problem is with capitalism, is that we've never really tried it. For capitalism to work money must have value, but Nixon threw that ideal away by closing the gold window. That allowed nations to basically stop paying their bills, and inflate to dissipate debt. Once you do that, it skews how wealth is invested, and tends (eventually) to hold in aspic the asset rich and asset poor.
In the end, we are in the grip of corporatism, state based market engineering by central bank.
Well said! May seeking to end QE is an encouraging sign. Interest rates going above essentially zero would too.
QE is the epitome of "magic money tree" economics
Actually I think QE served a short term purpose after 2008. The problem is that it has, like ZIRP, become entrenched. A market analyst in the USA quipped 'there are no fundamentals any more - the Fed is the fundamentals'. Putting money into circulation has a positive effect on GDP, but it also distorts asset values and destroys savings. It kills proper allocation of resources and risk management. The whole world is systemically more risky. Taking a painkiller for a day or two after an operation is good. Getting addicted to painkillers and still being on them 6 or 7 years later ain't.
''She is arguing for Government intervention in business and markets where they are seen to have failed.''
The only markets that 'fail' are surely those that aren't free enough. The conservative answer to expensive gas prices for example is deregulate and increase competition.
Adam Smith himself warned against the power of monopolies and corporations. It requires intervention to break monopolies and corporations for markets to be truly free.
The problem for the Conservative Assn in Witney is that their years of domination may have created a degree of lethargy.
The Conservatives are canvassing pretty hard in Witney, though not as hard as the Lib Dems. I was in a shop earlier this week when the Conservative candidate came in to talk about his "five-point plan". Much nodding, shaking of hands etc. After he left the shop manager said "My God! He looks like a 12-year old!". I'm not convinced they've chosen the strongest of candidates.
Theresa May's calculation is that the red-in-tooth-and-claw free market economics of the 1980s, that worked so well then, might not be working quite so well now and Conservatives have to ditch unadulterated dogmatic worship of markets and lead reform of capitalism instead, where it has notably failed at the human level, if free market economics are to survive.
In this, I think she is correct.
Reforming the free market doesn't require the state to expand to a stage where it rivals the size of China or Scandinavian countries.
I don't think May is advocating that nor is she advocating tax rises and redistribution.
She is arguing for Government intervention in business and markets where they are seen to have failed.
The housing market is where I can justifiably say the market has failed, I can't think of many more. Some abuses which should be punished (PPI, emissions cheating) but no outright failures. When oil and gas prices fell, so did energy and petrol prices. We need to further deregulate what we can, not move to some system of government intervention.
A bizarre conclusion seeing has Trump has comfortable polling leads in the state. It is one of the few swing states he is actually doing okay in.
I currently expect him to carry Ohio but lose the election, probably with Clinton scoring 300+ in the electoral college.
As a point of interest, were that to happen, it would be the first time a candidate has won Ohio but lost the election.
I posted it because Nate Silver had Trump winning Ohio, but that has changed recently as more polls have been done after the debate.
Nationally, yes, but I haven't seen any new OH polls that have Hillary ahead ––– I may have missed them however!
I don't think there have been any recent OH polls putting Hilary ahead. I expect 538 are giving Ohio to her, because you would assume that she'd win the State if she's about 4% ahead. That said, a 4% lead might see North Carolina going to Hilary, and Ohio to Trump, as current polling indicates.
Thanks, Sean – that would be my analysis too. I think differential demographics between the two states will likely see them falling different ways, were the national lead to remain roughly where it is.
As a point of interest, were that to happen, it would be the first time a candidate has won Ohio but lost the election.
I posted it because Nate Silver had Trump winning Ohio, but that has changed recently as more polls have been done after the debate.
Nationally, yes, but I haven't seen any new OH polls that have Hillary ahead ––– I may have missed them however!
I.
Thanks, Sean – that would be my analysis too. I think differential demographics between the two states will likely see them falling different ways, were the national lead to remain roughly where it is.
Obama won by 4% in 2012, but if that were the margin this time, we'd surely expect a few States to vote slightly differently to the way they did then.
I don't think Miliband was criticised for pointing out the problems in some business sectors, it was his method of intervention that was concerning. His energy price freeze was a bad idea, particularly as it prompted some companies to offer deals to customer to lock them into prices that ultimately ended up as very poor deals, and he never explained how a price freeze would work if it became loss making.
The argument should be about being for or against intervention, but how do we make markets work better, and sometimes that will require government directly intervening. BT for one example needs a bloody good kicking.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
Always amusing when a tedious troll who helped topple a Tory MP tells me, who has helped elect several Tory MPs, that I'm a TINO.
Its like all the Green Party and TUSC members who joined Labour under Corbyn and then proceeded to denounce Labour party members of long standing as Tories.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
Matthew Parris once suggested stringing piano wire across cycle lanes.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
A crackdown on cyclists (preferably banning them from roads) would be admirable.
Maybe we should simply recognise that cyclists are now major road users and licence / tax them as we do other road users??? They get to behave like arseholes because they get it for free.
Always amusing when a tedious troll who helped topple a Tory MP tells me, who has helped elect several Tory MPs, that I'm a TINO.
Its like all the Green Party and TUSC members who joined Labour under Corbyn and then proceeded to denounce Labour party members of long standing as Tories.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I agree with most. I fear though your (h) fails to consider the effect of narrow saddles.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I agree with most. I fear though your (h) fails to consider the effect of narrow saddles.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I agree with most. I fear though your (h) fails to consider the effect of narrow saddles.
He means actual, shall we say, "interactions" with the bike...
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
It would have taken just 0.4% of Dem voters (263,875 people) to have voted Republican to have given Romeny the win.
The Electoral College is intended to deliver a big win in delegates for a modest lead in votes.
2004 is an unusual case where it didn't. Bush led by almost as big a margin as Obama in 2012, but only led by 35 in the Electoral College. He piled up votes where he didn't need them, while falling just short in some key States.
Tim Marshall http://reaction.life/eu-things-fall-apart/ "This summer’s Eurobarometer showed that across the bloc trust in the EU had fallen from 57% in 2007 to 33% now. The Pew Research Centre finds that only 38% of the French view the EU favourably."
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I agree with most. I fear though your (h) fails to consider the effect of narrow saddles.
I am assured that is a myth!
Team GB worked out it wasn't iirc and made significant changes to their saddles in order to protect the tender regions of cyclists.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
Every non-cyclist has one unflattering anecdote about cyclists.
Cyclists have so many bad experiences of effing shocking driving and gormless walking that to list them would take several days.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I seriously doubt point "h" would be true.
Indeed. You should see (*) some of the saddle-sores I've had in the past. A waddling man is not a sex symbol.
Some bizarre state results from Google Consumer Surveys.
On the one hand, they show Trump 8 points ahead in Florida and 11 points ahead in North Carolina. On the other, they show Clinton 25 points ahead in New Hampshire, tying in Kentucky and winning Indiana by 2 points.
I'm not convinced Google has got the hang of this political stuff.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I seriously doubt point "h" would be true.
Indeed. You should see (*) some of the saddle-sores I've had in the past. A waddling man is not a sex symbol.
(*) Or perhaps not.
When there was the reports of team GB no shaving policy it was shocking to learn that in the recent past it hasn't been uncommon for female cyclists to require serious corrective surgery.
Some bizarre state results from Google Consumer Surveys.
On the one hand, they show Trump 8 points ahead in Florida and 11 points ahead in North Carolina. On the other, they show Clinton 25 points ahead in New Hampshire, tying in Kentucky and winning Indiana by 2 points.
I'm not convinced Google has got the hang of this political stuff.
Some bizarre state results from Google Consumer Surveys.
On the one hand, they show Trump 8 points ahead in Florida and 11 points ahead in North Carolina. On the other, they show Clinton 25 points ahead in New Hampshire, tying in Kentucky and winning Indiana by 2 points.
I'm not convinced Google has got the hang of this political stuff.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I agree with most. I fear though your (h) fails to consider the effect of narrow saddles.
I am assured that is a myth!
Team GB worked out it wasn't iirc and made significant changes to their saddles in order to protect the tender regions of cyclists.
I was of course semi-joking about (h)
But yes the new saddles all have gaps there to protect the prostate area.
But overall cycling is beneficial for sex nowadays due to better blood flow and general health and fitness it confers on the participant.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
Every non-cyclist has one unflattering anecdote about cyclists.
Cyclists have so many bad experiences of effing shocking driving and gormless walking that to list them would take several days.
I used to long-distance walk, cycle for fun, and drive. I've seen pedestrians, cyclists and drivers do terrible, stupid things on the road.
One of the things I don't like about the cycling lobby is their pretence that cyclists are never in the wrong.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
It would have taken just 0.4% of Dem voters (263,875 people) to have voted Republican to have given Romeny the win.
If the GOP had a better candidate they would easily have won. I think the problem for the Dems doesn't go away with Trump though. The underlying issue of fewer Americans than ever feeling the benefits of the economy doesn't go away for the Dems and Clinton definitely isn't going to solve the problem. A better GOP candidate should walk it in 2020.
I cycle - I even wear a helmet - but I'm polite enough to do this off the roads on tracks and lanes. Roads are designed for cars. Bicycle lanes for bicycles. Keep them apart. Like they do in Holland where I used to cycle places. Mixing incompatible users on the roads is a recipe for solving our organ donor shortage.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
Every non-cyclist has one unflattering anecdote about cyclists.
Cyclists have so many bad experiences of effing shocking driving and gormless walking that to list them would take several days.
I used to long-distance walk, cycle for fun, and drive. I've seen pedestrians, cyclists and drivers do terrible, stupid things on the road.
One of the things I don't like about the cycling lobby is their pretence that cyclists are never in the wrong.
That's the same with most 'lobbies' to some extent.
Cameron believed, first and foremost, in business. His was the hedge fund premiership, the friend of global capitalism. He was our CEO, not our PM. And make no mistake: that’s the reason – the only reason – he wanted to stay in the EU. He knew it was the capitalist’s friend.
With Theresa May we have a prime minister back. Yes, there was a lot of rhetoric and not much policy. But the rhetoric was pro-government, centre-left, red Tory. For the vicar’s daughter, the community comes first: we need our politics to be “more than individualism and self interest”. And there was a thinly veiled attack on Phillip Green. Well done. None of this could have come from Dave.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
I err more towards the @SeanT view of this. May seems to have correctly read what the Leave vote was as a cultural event. She's recrafting the Conservatives perfectly as the party to represent that event. In a FPTP system she could get a Thatcher style landslide doing that. The downer on her on PB.com is due the vast over representation of globalising Brexiters on here. You've been had. I've no sympathy whatsoever. No hindsight is needed. It was clear what sort of a cultural phenomenon Leave was.
That all said the capacity for Brexit to go moderately to catastrophically wrong is very real. With the variables so high who would bet against May meeting Brown's fate ? She could well be used to absorb the Brexit radiation dose then a different wing of the Conservatives reasserts themselves.
Certainly it was the most culturally divisive speech by a PM in my life time. I've never been clearer about who is the enemy within. May is defining that enemy much much more broadly than Thatcher ever did. But under FPTP you can tell 48.1% of the population to f**k off and win a landslide. If Brexit doesn't consume her first I think she just might.
Some bizarre state results from Google Consumer Surveys.
On the one hand, they show Trump 8 points ahead in Florida and 11 points ahead in North Carolina. On the other, they show Clinton 25 points ahead in New Hampshire, tying in Kentucky and winning Indiana by 2 points.
I'm not convinced Google has got the hang of this political stuff.
Some bizarre state results from Google Consumer Surveys.
On the one hand, they show Trump 8 points ahead in Florida and 11 points ahead in North Carolina. On the other, they show Clinton 25 points ahead in New Hampshire, tying in Kentucky and winning Indiana by 2 points.
I'm not convinced Google has got the hang of this political stuff.
That would be a striking set of results.
Indeed. I suspect you would get some seriously long odds were you to pop those together in an accumulator.
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
If more people got out of their cars and biked instead there would be
a) fewer accidents b) less pollution c) thinner, better looking people d) less sickness e) less pressure on companies through absence f) less congestion g) better mental health h) more sex
All to prop up inflated house prices, in the belief it's keeping spending afloat - I think it's actually got past the point of being utterly counterproductive myself.
It won't be pain free to unwind ultra low rates, but unwound they must be. May's nod too this today was the first shaft of light in the darkness in my view. Now for some action please.
I agree with you, and it's the big monetary challenge but can't come soon enough. Knocking QE on the head and returning interest rates to something akin to normal needs to happen whilst we can manage it.
Define "normal" (other than as a rate which works for me). If/when they do rise it will be interesting to see how the a "sterling collapse is good" posters can 180 to "exporters will cope".
Sterling falling (it hasn't collapsed) is only good so long as inflation remains within acceptable parameters. Unusually we are in a situation where inflation is low so marginally stoking it from a one off external shock is a very good thing. Plus at the moment our balance of trade figure our terrible.
If inflation rises and our balance of trade improves then we'd be in a position to see sterling recover.
I cycle - I even wear a helmet - but I'm polite enough to do this off the roads on tracks and lanes. Roads are designed for cars. Bicycle lanes for bicycles. Keep them apart. Like they do in Holland where I used to cycle places. Mixing incompatible users on the roads is a recipe for solving our organ donor shortage.
Which would be a fine approach were there enough cycle lanes. Sadly, we are doomed to use the road in many areas as there isn't sufficient provision of alternatives.
I was really proud of last night's one, 'they do say, history does repeat, first as tragedy, then as Farage.'
I think the reason why puns are so brilliant is their subtlety.
English is the best language in the world for precisely this reason (as well as its ability to absorbs words from both Germanic and Latin, and from other tongues from around the world).
It would have taken just 0.4% of Dem voters (263,875 people) to have voted Republican to have given Romeny the win.
If the GOP had a better candidate they would easily have won. I think the problem for the Dems doesn't go away with Trump though. The underlying issue of fewer Americans than ever feeling the benefits of the economy doesn't go away for the Dems and Clinton definitely isn't going to solve the problem. A better GOP candidate should walk it in 2020.
In political terms, the speech was clever. There are an awful lot of voters who will nod along with her criticism of a ‘sneering’ elite who view themselves as ‘global citizens’ and her demands that multinational businesses accept that they have obligations to the communities they operate in. There’ll be traditional Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn’s pseudo-academic left-wingery and will like the tone of this speech, as well as the plan to put workers on board.
I was really proud of last night's one, 'they do say, history does repeat, first as tragedy, then as Farage.'
I think the reason why puns are so brilliant is their subtlety.
English is the best language in the world for precisely this reason (as well as its ability to absorbs words from both Germanic, Latin and other tongues from around the world).
I could amuse you all with my German sausage joke - but I won't because German sausage jokes are just about the wurst!
I was really proud of last night's one, 'they do say, history does repeat, first as tragedy, then as Farage.'
I think the reason why puns are so brilliant is their subtlety.
English is the best language in the world for precisely this reason (as well as its ability to absorbs words from both Germanic, Latin and other tongues from around the world).
I could amuse you all with my German sausage joke - but I won't because German sausage jokes are just about the wurst!
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
Every non-cyclist has one unflattering anecdote about cyclists.
Cyclists have so many bad experiences of effing shocking driving and gormless walking that to list them would take several days.
I used to long-distance walk, cycle for fun, and drive. I've seen pedestrians, cyclists and drivers do terrible, stupid things on the road.
One of the things I don't like about the cycling lobby is their pretence that cyclists are never in the wrong.
As a committed cyclist I agree with you about this to some degree - but I think that for many the issue is one of differential consequences. It is not that cyclists are never in the wrong, but that if they are then... yeah, some people are idiots but no big deal.
If a cyclist is an idiot (and some are obviously), then a collision with a pedestrian is clearly bad, but very unlikely to be life-threatening (and the consequences to the pedestrian and cyclists are distributed roughly evenly on average). By contrast a driver being an idiot has a much higher likelihood of causing long-term damage AND the cyclist takes all the (physical) consequences. It is this differential consequence that causes a lot of frustration from cyclists from what I've seen.
Re Cycling: As a confirmed pedestrian I'd always been pro cyclist. I saw them as kindred spirits. An enemy of my enemy at least. Then I spent 3 years in London. They are an ill disciplined menace. An extraordinary sense of entitlement. I was quite shocked.
In political terms, the speech was clever. There are an awful lot of voters who will nod along with her criticism of a ‘sneering’ elite who view themselves as ‘global citizens’ and her demands that multinational businesses accept that they have obligations to the communities they operate in. There’ll be traditional Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn’s pseudo-academic left-wingery and will like the tone of this speech, as well as the plan to put workers on board.
She will also run into all the same problem as other governments that have tried to tax the highly mobile high earners (they bugger off) or rich multinationals (they challenge everything in court forever, find a way around it with good advise, or bugger off)
Always amusing when a tedious troll who helped topple a Tory MP tells me, who has helped elect several Tory MPs, that I'm a TINO.
So when are you going to sod off and join the Europhiles in the LibDems?
I'm staying. I didn't bugger off when the IDS lot took control, I stayed and fought, and changed my party for the better.
I'll do it again.
Who do we back to get rid of our Gordon, though? I'm begginning to warm to George.
I had a very interesting discussion yesterday with someone yesterday about that, it touches on Brexit on how Mrs May gets toppled in the next year.
It can happen.
A challenge from Ozzy would be fun indeed.
The challenge won't be from Ozzy, though he could be the beneficiary.
As long as it is from that wing of the party – the classical liberals, I'll be relatively happy. I'm beginning to find May's 'pal of the WWC', statist, 'anti-elite', anti-foreigner, 'common sense' rhetoric just a little bit sinister...
May's philosophy amounts to a kind of headmistress whack-a-mole management that keeps the Daily Mail headline writers sweet.
I did laugh at the way 'May savages liberal elite' was juxtaposed with 'Cycle lane lunacy! The new blight paralysing Britain.'
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
Yes, cyclists, just the group that needs 'cracking down' on. Again, as with the foreigner listing, I'd like to see the government try.
If the government starts putting caltrops in cycle lanes, I might have to start reconsidering my opposition to the Conservatives. Round my way they're a bloody nightmare.
I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist who didn't stop at a pedestrian signal as I was crossing, must have missed me by an inch. Was near Elephant & Castle, a few years back.
And I've come off, with subsequent visits to London Bridge Hospital, following a half-witted pedestrian stepping out without looking. I'm struggling with your point.
Every non-cyclist has one unflattering anecdote about cyclists.
Cyclists have so many bad experiences of effing shocking driving and gormless walking that to list them would take several days.
I used to long-distance walk, cycle for fun, and drive. I've seen pedestrians, cyclists and drivers do terrible, stupid things on the road.
One of the things I don't like about the cycling lobby is their pretence that cyclists are never in the wrong.
As a committed cyclist I agree with you about this to some degree - but I think that for many the issue is one of differential consequences. It is not that cyclists are never in the wrong, but that if they are then... yeah, some people are idiots but no big deal.
If a cyclist is an idiot (and some are obviously), then a collision with a pedestrian is clearly bad, but very unlikely to be life-threatening (and the consequences to the pedestrian and cyclists are distributed roughly evenly on average). By contrast a driver being an idiot has a much higher likelihood of causing long-term damage AND the cyclist takes all the (physical) consequences. It is this differential consequence that causes a lot of frustration from cyclists from what I've seen.
In political terms, the speech was clever. There are an awful lot of voters who will nod along with her criticism of a ‘sneering’ elite who view themselves as ‘global citizens’ and her demands that multinational businesses accept that they have obligations to the communities they operate in. There’ll be traditional Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn’s pseudo-academic left-wingery and will like the tone of this speech, as well as the plan to put workers on board.
She will also run into all the same problem as other governments that have tried to tax the highly mobile high earners (they bugger off) or rich multinationals (they challenge everything in court forever, find a way around it with good advise, or bugger off)
The Coalition government did a lot more going after international high earners than New Labour ever did - so you could say May is just continuing the Cameron/Osborne policy....
If a cyclist is an idiot (and some are obviously), then a collision with a pedestrian is clearly bad, but very unlikely to be life-threatening (and the consequences to the pedestrian and cyclists are distributed roughly evenly on average). By contrast a driver being an idiot has a much higher likelihood of causing long-term damage AND the cyclist takes all the (physical) consequences. It is this differential consequence that causes a lot of frustration from cyclists from what I've seen.
You would think on the whole if you have a 100% likelihood of coming off worst in a grudge match with a car that cyclists wouldn't (for example) ride straight in front of a lane of traffic as the lights turn green and cross his fingers that he can get across before the boy racer in the front buries the throttle in the carpet and puts the cyclist in hospital. I have seen it happen many times in Swindon, mostly they get away with it but a few have had a nasty scare.
In political terms, the speech was clever. There are an awful lot of voters who will nod along with her criticism of a ‘sneering’ elite who view themselves as ‘global citizens’ and her demands that multinational businesses accept that they have obligations to the communities they operate in. There’ll be traditional Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn’s pseudo-academic left-wingery and will like the tone of this speech, as well as the plan to put workers on board.
The more I read from you, the more I am convinced you work for CCHQ. You simply back the Tory administration of the day, and its aims. Whether they be pro-Cameron, pro-Ozzy, pro-Remain or pro-May, anti-'elite', anti-Ozzy.
It would have taken just 0.4% of Dem voters (263,875 people) to have voted Republican to have given Romeny the win.
If the GOP had a better candidate they would easily have won. I think the problem for the Dems doesn't go away with Trump though. The underlying issue of fewer Americans than ever feeling the benefits of the economy doesn't go away for the Dems and Clinton definitely isn't going to solve the problem. A better GOP candidate should walk it in 2020.
4 more years of Demographics ticking away against the GOP in it's current form.
The GOP produced a startlingly forthright report into what went wrong in 2012 (failing to appeal to Hispanics being a key finding) and they managed to pick the Mexicans-are-rapists candidate this time round.
As I said I thought they have 2016 as a lock but I'm not so sure about 2020 even with a non-disaster as candidate.
Always amusing when a tedious troll who helped topple a Tory MP tells me, who has helped elect several Tory MPs, that I'm a TINO.
So when are you going to sod off and join the Europhiles in the LibDems?
I'm staying. I didn't bugger off when the IDS lot took control, I stayed and fought, and changed my party for the better.
I'll do it again.
Who do we back to get rid of our Gordon, though? I'm begginning to warm to George.
I don't get the Theresa = Gordo comparison.
Has she actually branded a poor northern lady a "bigot"?
I don't think she shares his idiosyncracies.
A sudden, wistful memory of "farmy-farm"
This is the land of lost content I see it shining plain The happy highways where I went And cannot come again...
What is farmy farm??
During Gordon Brown's bonkers premiership we had a little pb competition to see who could could create the most insane and ludicrous rumour about his weirdness. I came up with "farmy farm", and if you Google it you can see others took it and ran with it...
Here it is
I know an aide to Gordon Brown. The aide, a woman in her 30s, tells me Gordon Brown has a collection of tiny china figurines which he keeps in a shoebox - tiny sheperdesses and horses and farmers and pigs and the like. My friend says most nights when he’s alone with his aides and the wife he gets them out and plays “farmy-farm” with the little dolls, making the horses jump over tiny hedges etc. He even takes the miniature cows to the Number 10 toilet so they can do “Brownpats” as he makes little mooing noises.
The staff’s big fear is that he will take his “farmy-farm” set to the Commons and be caught on TV playing with it just before PMQs. He’s come pretty close already - during the non-election debate, a miniature sheep apparently fell from his breast pocket onto Ruth Kelly’s hair, and was there right through the broadcast.
Amazingly no one noticed, but they reckon it’s just a matter of time.
In political terms, the speech was clever. There are an awful lot of voters who will nod along with her criticism of a ‘sneering’ elite who view themselves as ‘global citizens’ and her demands that multinational businesses accept that they have obligations to the communities they operate in. There’ll be traditional Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn’s pseudo-academic left-wingery and will like the tone of this speech, as well as the plan to put workers on board.
She will also run into all the same problem as other governments that have tried to tax the highly mobile high earners (they bugger off) or rich multinationals (they challenge everything in court forever, find a way around it with good advise, or bugger off)
The Coalition government did a lot more going after international high earners than New Labour ever did - so you could say May is just continuing the Cameron/Osborne policy....
There was lots of high flown rhetoric, I am not sure the amounts raised were all that impressive.
Comments
A new crackdown on cyclists can't be far off.
I'll do it again.
The argument should be about being for or against intervention, but how do we make markets work better, and sometimes that will require government directly intervening. BT for one example needs a bloody good kicking.
Labour (Corbyn) 1/10
Liberal (Farron) 2/10
Conservative (May) 3/10
Total = 3/30
Any other offers?
Has she actually branded a poor northern lady a "bigot"?
a) fewer accidents
b) less pollution
c) thinner, better looking people
d) less sickness
e) less pressure on companies through absence
f) less congestion
g) better mental health
h) more sex
Build more bloody railways!
I) More Trains!
Obama won by a 'dominant' 332 to 206 margin.
It would have taken just 0.4% of Dem voters (263,875 people) to have voted Republican to have given Romeny the win.
Only so were those people in exactly the right states – vanishingly unlikely
2004 is an unusual case where it didn't. Bush led by almost as big a margin as Obama in 2012, but only led by 35 in the Electoral College. He piled up votes where he didn't need them, while falling just short in some key States.
2005: Labour won 91 more seats then the Tories in England, but the Tories won the popular vote.
"This summer’s Eurobarometer showed that across the bloc trust in the EU had fallen from 57% in 2007 to 33% now. The Pew Research Centre finds that only 38% of the French view the EU favourably."
Cyclists have so many bad experiences of effing shocking driving and gormless walking that to list them would take several days.
(*) Or perhaps not.
On the one hand, they show Trump 8 points ahead in Florida and 11 points ahead in North Carolina. On the other, they show Clinton 25 points ahead in New Hampshire, tying in Kentucky and winning Indiana by 2 points.
I'm not convinced Google has got the hang of this political stuff.
But yes the new saddles all have gaps there to protect the prostate area.
But overall cycling is beneficial for sex nowadays due to better blood flow and general health and fitness it confers on the participant.
One of the things I don't like about the cycling lobby is their pretence that cyclists are never in the wrong.
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/new-trains/
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1e4jJwRGEks/V55nNs1S8jI/AAAAAAAAW1U/Co2FEldG6qcE0GAFe-8_DEgzQs2HSxEowCLcB/s640/El+3.PNG
http://www.railjournal.com/media/k2/items/cache/90f172aa7be7dc58cfb64dbe03ae62a4_XL.jpg
On that we can agree. I own no biking garb at all, nor do I employ any razors!
https://www.blueorigin.com/#youtubebqUIX3Z4r3k
I mean, really, Jeff Bezos. I know the rocket == phallic symbol joke's been around since Sputnik, but that's no reason to make it quite so obvious!
I'm not a fan of lobbies!
Cameron believed, first and foremost, in business. His was the hedge fund premiership, the friend of global capitalism. He was our CEO, not our PM. And make no mistake: that’s the reason – the only reason – he wanted to stay in the EU. He knew it was the capitalist’s friend.
With Theresa May we have a prime minister back. Yes, there was a lot of rhetoric and not much policy. But the rhetoric was pro-government, centre-left, red Tory. For the vicar’s daughter, the community comes first: we need our politics to be “more than individualism and self interest”. And there was a thinly veiled attack on Phillip Green. Well done. None of this could have come from Dave.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/05/theresa-may-speech-tory-conference-panel-verdict
http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/8203-derby-s-bombardier-gets-900m-trains-deal-boost/story-29765831-detail/story.html
(*) I know it's technically Bombardier, but it'll always be BREL to me!
That all said the capacity for Brexit to go moderately to catastrophically wrong is very real. With the variables so high who would bet against May meeting Brown's fate ? She could well be used to absorb the Brexit radiation dose then a different wing of the Conservatives reasserts themselves.
Certainly it was the most culturally divisive speech by a PM in my life time. I've never been clearer about who is the enemy within. May is defining that enemy much much more broadly than Thatcher ever did. But under FPTP you can tell 48.1% of the population to f**k off and win a landslide. If Brexit doesn't consume her first I think she just might.
If inflation rises and our balance of trade improves then we'd be in a position to see sterling recover.
I was really proud of last night's one, 'they do say, history does repeat, first as tragedy, then as Farage.'
I think the reason why my puns are so brilliant is their subtlety.
It can happen.
In political terms, the speech was clever. There are an awful lot of voters who will nod along with her criticism of a ‘sneering’ elite who view themselves as ‘global citizens’ and her demands that multinational businesses accept that they have obligations to the communities they operate in. There’ll be traditional Labour voters who don’t like Corbyn’s pseudo-academic left-wingery and will like the tone of this speech, as well as the plan to put workers on board.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/theresa-mays-carpe-brexit-speech/
If a cyclist is an idiot (and some are obviously), then a collision with a pedestrian is clearly bad, but very unlikely to be life-threatening (and the consequences to the pedestrian and cyclists are distributed roughly evenly on average). By contrast a driver being an idiot has a much higher likelihood of causing long-term damage AND the cyclist takes all the (physical) consequences. It is this differential consequence that causes a lot of frustration from cyclists from what I've seen.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1897166/george-osborne-is-charging-75000-a-pop-to-give-after-dinner-speeches-more-than-an-mps-annual-salary/
If he can command that for a speech why shouldn't he charge it? I would.
Clinton 44 .. Trump 37
http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=7399
The more I read from you, the more I am convinced you work for CCHQ. You simply back the Tory administration of the day, and its aims. Whether they be pro-Cameron, pro-Ozzy, pro-Remain or pro-May, anti-'elite', anti-Ozzy.
You change with the political wind.
The GOP produced a startlingly forthright report into what went wrong in 2012 (failing to appeal to Hispanics being a key finding) and they managed to pick the Mexicans-are-rapists candidate this time round.
As I said I thought they have 2016 as a lock but I'm not so sure about 2020 even with a non-disaster as candidate.
It appears to be running away from Trump.
He needs to ace the next debate, probably both, to have a chance.
https://twitter.com/YouGovUS/status/783640247070560256
Clinton 50 .. Trump 40
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com.s3.amazonaws.com/polls/20161005_National_1.pdf