I have the popcorn ready for later on....don't let me down Donald, go total loco.
Packers/ Giants tonight, but I will be watching bits of the debate on the laptop. It looks like Trump has nothing to lose right now so god only knows what he will come out with tonight.
They always say each POTUS campaign is the most expensive yet...this time it could be off the charts as the cost to the donald's brand dependent fortune could be billions.
They always say each POTUS campaign is the most expensive yet...this time it could be off the charts as the cost to the donald's brand dependent fortune could be billions.
I'd guess there may be a whole raft of sexual harassment cases to be paid for as well..
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
I have to say it is a little surprising that if trump regularly spouted awful stuff on mic over 10+ seasons of the apprentice that nothing has leaked before he even thought a out running for POTUS.
Think how for instance Christian bale has a terrible reputation in Hollywood & eventually somebody just went sod it & released him going ape shit.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Hmm, ethically dodgy to pay for him breaking a contract. Maybe a private individual could stump up the cash.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Hmm, ethically dodgy to pay for him breaking a contract. Maybe a private individual could stump up the cash.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Hmm, ethically dodgy to pay for him breaking a contract. Maybe a private individual could stump up the cash.
Is it even legal? I don't know.
I've seen phone companies (I think, some sort of utility, anyway) say they'll pay your penalties for early cancellation with another firm.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Hmm, ethically dodgy to pay for him breaking a contract. Maybe a private individual could stump up the cash.
Is it even legal? I don't know.
I've seen phone companies (I think, some sort of utility, anyway) say they'll pay your penalties for early cancellation with another firm.
I think a better analogy would be an employee of one phone company leaking your personal data to the rival one.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Hmm, ethically dodgy to pay for him breaking a contract. Maybe a private individual could stump up the cash.
Is it even legal? I don't know.
In English law it would be doubtful whether Burnett could enforce the clause against the employee, and a cursory Google suggests us law is the same. I doubt it would be illegal for a third party to agree to pay on the employee's behalf, it the penalty turns out to be enforceable.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Hmm, ethically dodgy to pay for him breaking a contract. Maybe a private individual could stump up the cash.
Is it even legal? I don't know.
In English law it would be doubtful whether Burnett could enforce the clause against the employee, and a cursory Google suggests us law is the same. I doubt it would be illegal for a third party to agree to pay on the employee's behalf, it the penalty turns out to be enforceable.
If that's the case, $5 million is chicken feed then. If the tapes have something terrible on them we will be hearing them.
Isn't it a disgrace for a national news organisation to sit on something that could be electorally relevant at this point?
It's The Apprentice producer Burnett who owns them and he's ransoming them off for five million dollars. If I was a news organisation that could afford that sort of cash (and can they?), I'd tell him that any money paid for it has to go to relevant charities or no deal.
That isn't the case. The 5 million is supposedly to pay the fine for breach of contract by an employee.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
You could be cynical and say right now he's the centre of the story, and when/if the tapes come out he won't be.
Or that guys worth 100s of millions got there by leveraging all the profit they can out of every situation and they don't lose that habit.
538 don't grade the LA Times but they do use their polls. Historically it has a Republican bias of +4 so the lead of +2 for Trump translates to a lead of +2 for Clinton. It is a seven day moving average so it takes a little time to catch up with events.
I said "bugger" on Radio4 a few years ago and it didn't do my career any harm.
Are you famous then GeoffM?
Hahaha - not at all! I was on a quiz show and I gave the wrong answer to something that I knew. You can hear me mutter it under my breath instinctively.
My first assessment (assuming Macron doesn't make waves) is that the most likely winner of the French Presidency is Juppé (62%) follwed by Le Pen (16%), Sarkozy (16%), Hollande (4%) and Montebourg (2.5%). Although I can check the markets iirc that makes Juppé value, as I think he was comfortably outside evens when I last checked.
Re: returned postal ballots, surely a lot of Republicans must be fully intending to return them, but sitting on them to see if they'll have to write in a candidate, or for that matter weighing up voting for Johnson.
A most unfair and unworthy statement. The chicken entrails have a far greater chance of being accurate.
La Times may be skewed to the GOP - but presumably the trend would be pretty accurate.
At the moment of course things are not developing necesserilly to Trump's advantage - but there are 4 weeks to go.
The media cycle could move on from Trump's comments, just as it did from Hillary's incident at the 9/11 memorial, which now seems to be forgotten. However, the mass withdrawal of Republican bigwig support looks like the real game-changer.
Re: returned postal ballots, surely a lot of Republicans must be fully intending to return them, but sitting on them to see if they'll have to write in a candidate, or for that matter weighing up voting for Johnson.
The Democrat's theory of voter modeling says there are very few real undecideds. Only people who have yet to be convinced to vote for their natural party. Debate 1 in 2012 combined Republicans to vote but not work of them, debate 2 and 3 combined Obama voters to vote.
It would help him with his base. Thats for sure, could actually be good for him as thats all he has left now.
Thats one the most wrong caricutures you could imagine.
the republican base are ok with him admitting to committing sexual assaults
That sounds to me like a completely bollocks over generalisation, and certainly not one that I would buy from anyone other than an American, which i assume you are not. What I am not clear about is why you keep writing posts which really boil down to "I hate Trump" - which is fair enough but not illuminating. If you are just doing your best to ensure we all get out and vote for Hillary on 8 November, I am afraid you are labouring under a misapprehension.
A most unfair and unworthy statement. The chicken entrails have a far greater chance of being accurate.
La Times may be skewed to the GOP - but presumably the trend would be pretty accurate.
At the moment of course things are not developing necesserilly to Trump's advantage - but there are 4 weeks to go.
The media cycle could move on from Trump's comments, just as it did from Hillary's incident at the 9/11 memorial, which now seems to be forgotten. However, the mass withdrawal of Republican bigwig support looks like the real game-changer.
Does it - Trump is the 'anti-establishment' candidate in effect if not in name. The fact that the establishment are dropping him could be construed positively.
A most unfair and unworthy statement. The chicken entrails have a far greater chance of being accurate.
La Times may be skewed to the GOP - but presumably the trend would be pretty accurate.
At the moment of course things are not developing necesserilly to Trump's advantage - but there are 4 weeks to go.
The media cycle could move on from Trump's comments, just as it did from Hillary's incident at the 9/11 memorial, which now seems to be forgotten. However, the mass withdrawal of Republican bigwig support looks like the real game-changer.
Does it - Trump is the 'anti-establishment' candidate in effect if not in name. The fact that the establishment are dropping him could be construed positively.
Not in GOTV/campaigning efforts.
The GOP infrastructure have dumped Trump/gone on strike.
It seems inconceivable Trump can win without their day to day/operational support.
Comments
But but but the PB Trump Rampers told me African Americans were going to vote for Trump in record numbers. Even DC is in play for Trump..
It'll only be the safe-space snowflakes obsessed with political correctness that'll be bothered by stuff like that.
Think about it Burnett is worth 100s millions, if he wanted to release them he owns the rights & that kind of money is irrevelant.
Mondale got 74% Dems if I remember correctly.
No idea as to where it stands on the Gold Standard tto Voodoo scale though:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/la-times-usc-dornsife-sunday-poll-donald-trump-retains-2-point-lead-hillary/
Think how for instance Christian bale has a terrible reputation in Hollywood & eventually somebody just went sod it & released him going ape shit.
Also they have issues with weighting, I think 538 would shift this to a 4 point Hilary lead.
https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats
Or that guys worth 100s of millions got there by leveraging all the profit they can out of every situation and they don't lose that habit.
PPPPolls are showing only 70% of registered Republicans voting for Trump. If you apply that to the early returns, the Trump lead disappears.
Reps just shy of catching Dems in returned ballots, passed on requests last week (Reps prefer mail ballots, Dems in-person, so expected)
Reps are expected to have lead now due to using mail in ballots.
https://twitter.com/wilw/status/784820051979472896
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3fWy9UMDHs
*One wonders what that Venn diagram looks like
"@EDM___HEAD: @realDonaldTrump @EdandBev lyin ass nigga" Why does Paula D get destroyed and you can use the "N" word so freely, asshole?
I was on a quiz show and I gave the wrong answer to something that I knew.
You can hear me mutter it under my breath instinctively.
Why the hell didn't he get the Top Gear gig?
https://twitter.com/joss/status/784876219774988292
At the moment of course things are not developing necesserilly to Trump's advantage - but there are 4 weeks to go.
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/785210428733489152
https://twitter.com/AskingAmy/status/784853613302669312
Not complaining, just curious.
The GOP infrastructure have dumped Trump/gone on strike.
It seems inconceivable Trump can win without their day to day/operational support.