Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The chances of Mrs May getting her own way on the Article 50 r

123468

Comments

  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    Go on, tell us what the breakdown of his senior females appts. You're sounding like an agenda blow-hard venting.

    Would you vote for him if he was still a Democrat? He was for years. Urgh eh?
  • welshowl said:

    As the £ continues its inexorable decline and the world outside the brexit bubble votes with its cash, my holiday in Oz this Xmas is becoming rather more costly than planned.

    New Year in Margaret River but will I be able to afford s bottle of cab sauv?

    Yes but my exported manufactured goods are getting more lucrative by the day. Nice bonus order from the Far East today ahead of when we expected, good stuff.

    I'm with Mervyn King: this is a great chance to reduce the trade deficit, reduce house prices, and raise interest rates.

    I'm currently sat in the Netherlands ( on an export sales trip ) about to have a steak at inflated prices courtesy of the £. I deeply couldn't give a monkeys as I know the benefit far outweighs the pain. Thing is it's also ultimately what the country needs as well as me.

    And you can claim it on expenses :-)

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the requesting stapointed.

    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Pointing out the deluded, self-defeating arguments of the opposing side doesn't tell you anything about what my values are.
    They all seem to be about money or accusing others of an "ism" crime
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited October 2016
    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
  • DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    As soon as Donald Trump tweets "The Republican Party is against me", a vacancy exists for the Republican nominee, and Rule 9 comes into play.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464

    welshowl said:

    As the £ continues its inexorable decline and the world outside the brexit bubble votes with its cash, my holiday in Oz this Xmas is becoming rather more costly than planned.

    New Year in Margaret River but will I be able to afford s bottle of cab sauv?

    Yes but my exported manufactured goods are getting more lucrative by the day. Nice bonus order from the Far East today ahead of when we expected, good stuff.

    I'm with Mervyn King: this is a great chance to reduce the trade deficit, reduce house prices, and raise interest rates.

    I'm currently sat in the Netherlands ( on an export sales trip ) about to have a steak at inflated prices courtesy of the £. I deeply couldn't give a monkeys as I know the benefit far outweighs the pain. Thing is it's also ultimately what the country needs as well as me.

    And you can claim it on expenses :-)

    Oh God. Yes.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    welshowl said:

    As the £ continues its inexorable decline and the world outside the brexit bubble votes with its cash, my holiday in Oz this Xmas is becoming rather more costly than planned.

    New Year in Margaret River but will I be able to afford s bottle of cab sauv?

    Yes but my exported manufactured goods are getting more lucrative by the day. Nice bonus order from the Far East today ahead of when we expected, good stuff.

    I'm with Mervyn King: this is a great chance to reduce the trade deficit, reduce house prices, and raise interest rates.

    I'm currently sat in the Netherlands ( on an export sales trip ) about to have a steak at inflated prices courtesy of the £. I deeply couldn't give a monkeys as I know the benefit far outweighs the pain. Thing is it's also ultimately what the country needs as well as me.

    And you can claim it on expenses :-)

    HA SO you must be rolling in it atm - all that currency gain from overseas. :-)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,917

    They all seem to be about money or accusing others of an "ism" crime

    You appear to be attacking someone else's arguments, not mine.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the requesting state must comply with. A requesting state, whether it is Italy or the Congo or Albania can seek extradition and the matter will be determined according to our laws. It is slow and cumbersome; it is the position which obtained before states entered into treaties to speed up the process. But in matters of criminal law, in matters pertaining to the freedoms and liberties of British citizens I value matters such as habeas corpus, the onus on the state to make out a prima facie case of an offence having been committed and the restraints which are placed on states by us having a requirement that people cannot be arrested for matters which are not crimes here rather highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might want to extradite alleged criminals from other countries, and, in practice, in the case of the EU countries, it's going to be hard to get agreement outside their existing EAW framework. So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    That's certainly what the EU27 are considering, if the noises coming from the continent are to be believed.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713
    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,295
    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Shouldn't a poll be compared with its previous figures, so we have to wait until those who polled before the debate and during the tapes present their next results? And how many tracking polls are you following compared to those reported here?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,501

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might want to extradite alleged criminals from other countries, and, in practice, in the case of the EU countries, it's going to be hard to get agreement outside their existing EAW framework. So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    We are not cutting our nose off. We are (or at least I am) valuing the rights we - citizens in Britain - and I am old-fashioned enough to think they should be the priority for the British government - have to a fair trial, the right not to be arrested and locked up without a prima facie case being made, without the right to habeas corpus, the right to a trial where the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the right to a trial where the prosecution has to prove its case to a higher standard than simply the balance of probabilities, the right to a trial by one's peers, the right to a proper evidential process, rights which have been built up over centuries rather more than easing the burden on bureaucrats in foreign legal processes which do not have such rights.

    That is not immaturity. It is valuing something which is special about our legal system, a legal system which says much about how we view the relationship between individuals and the state, a relationship which is - or should be - at the heart of our political system.

    Co-operation is all very well but to value it to the extent that we undermine our own legal system and the rights it gives our citizens seems to me to be an example of political immaturity. True friends do not trample over each others' fundamental beliefs. The English legal system is a key part of English identity; it is ours. And no amount of feeling European (as I do) or wishing to co-operate with European countries (as I think we should) will make me agree to abandon important principles and checks and balances which are a key part of what makes Britain what it is.

  • IanB2 said:

    almost $1.21

    You still haven't explained why we should give a damn when inflation remains stubbornly too low?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited October 2016
    As I said NeverTrump feels so shafted right now (and they are screwed whatever happens), some of them are renouncing their denouncing of Trump:

    http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/88235/republican-base-outraged-by-flight-from-trump

    "After calling on the Republican nominee for President to step aside, U.S. Senate candidate Darryl Glenn has gone back on his decision to not vote for Donald Trump."

    I expect more of them to follow by saying "well on the debate Trump put it aside and as long as there is nothing else I will vote for him" or something along those lines.

    A lot of 360 degree turns in 72 hours.
  • PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    I'm off as usual about now. Maybe see you around midnight or 4am - and NEVER first!
  • welshowl said:

    As the £ continues its inexorable decline and the world outside the brexit bubble votes with its cash, my holiday in Oz this Xmas is becoming rather more costly than planned.

    New Year in Margaret River but will I be able to afford s bottle of cab sauv?

    Yes but my exported manufactured goods are getting more lucrative by the day. Nice bonus order from the Far East today ahead of when we expected, good stuff.

    I'm with Mervyn King: this is a great chance to reduce the trade deficit, reduce house prices, and raise interest rates.

    I'm currently sat in the Netherlands ( on an export sales trip ) about to have a steak at inflated prices courtesy of the £. I deeply couldn't give a monkeys as I know the benefit far outweighs the pain. Thing is it's also ultimately what the country needs as well as me.

    And you can claim it on expenses :-)

    HA SO you must be rolling in it atm - all that currency gain from overseas. :-)

    Yep, billing in dollars and Euros is pretty rewarding currently.

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783
    Speedy said:


    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.

    In other words, he is positioned exactly where he wants to be four weeks before polling day - ready for a final spurt to overtake the front-runner, having lulled her into a false sense of security by being so far behind.

    And to complete his preparations, he's taken her completely by surprise by launching an all-out attack on his own party.

    A tactical genius.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Shouldn't a poll be compared with its previous figures, so we have to wait until those who polled before the debate and during the tapes present their next results? And how many tracking polls are you following compared to those reported here?
    8 daily and weekly tracking polls.
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited October 2016
    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    The pound fallen a further two cents today against the dollar. There doesn't seem to be a floor in sight.

    While the FTSE 100 reaches record highs. Have you asked BP whether there is a ceiling in sight?
    Sunderland voter with State pension heading to Spain for annual holiday concern about:

    a) exchange rate = high
    b) FTSE tracker = not so high
    Yeah I really want to give up the countries independence for ever for a bit more spending money on holiday.

    Some things are worth making a sacrifice for. This island making amending and repealing its own laws by an assembly that is booted out every five years and replaced by the peoples choice and interpreting those laws by a judiciary made of learned judges from this island, not ex commies from behind the iron curtain and hired in judges called Ronald McDonald from north America by countries with a lower population and size than Bedford; is one of them.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,501

    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
    That is simply not true. As my post at 6:40 pm makes clear. I suggest you reread it.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713
    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Shouldn't a poll be compared with its previous figures, so we have to wait until those who polled before the debate and during the tapes present their next results? And how many tracking polls are you following compared to those reported here?
    Begorrah JohnO me boy, good to see you on line. How's life ?

    I'm just watching The Quiet Man on Film 4 and thinking how much it must resemble Elmbridge
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,917
    Chris said:

    Speedy said:


    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.

    In other words, he is positioned exactly where he wants to be four weeks before polling day - ready for a final spurt to overtake the front-runner, having lulled her into a false sense of security by being so far behind.

    And to complete his preparations, he's taken her completely by surprise by launching an all-out attack on his own party.

    A tactical genius.
    Many a true word is said in jest.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    The pound fallen a further two cents today against the dollar. There doesn't seem to be a floor in sight.

    While the FTSE 100 reaches record highs. Have you asked BP whether there is a ceiling in sight?
    Sunderland voter with State pension heading to Spain for annual holiday concern about:

    a) exchange rate = high
    b) FTSE tracker = not so high
    Yeah I really want to give up the countries independence for ever for a bit more spending money on holiday.

    Some things are worth making a sacrifice for. This island making amending and repealing its own laws by an assembly that is booted out every five years and replaced by the peoples choice and interpreting those laws by a judiciary made of learned judges from this island, not ex commies from behind the iron curtain and hired in judges called Ronald McDonald from north America by countries with a lower population and size than Bedford; is one of them.
    Cheers loudly.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,944

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    welshowl said:

    As the £ continues its inexorable decline and the world outside the brexit bubble votes with its cash, my holiday in Oz this Xmas is becoming rather more costly than planned.

    New Year in Margaret River but will I be able to afford s bottle of cab sauv?

    Yes but my exported manufactured goods are getting more lucrative by the day. Nice bonus order from the Far East today ahead of when we expected, good stuff.

    I'm with Mervyn King: this is a great chance to reduce the trade deficit, reduce house prices, and raise interest rates.

    I'm currently sat in the Netherlands ( on an export sales trip ) about to have a steak at inflated prices courtesy of the £. I deeply couldn't give a monkeys as I know the benefit far outweighs the pain. Thing is it's also ultimately what the country needs as well as me.

    And you can claim it on expenses :-)

    HA SO you must be rolling in it atm - all that currency gain from overseas. :-)

    Yep, billing in dollars and Euros is pretty rewarding currently.

    I'll put you down as a Leave if there's a re-run :-)
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    Cyclefree said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might want to extradite alleged criminals from other countries, and, in practice, in the case of the EU countries, it's going to be hard to get agreement outside their existing EAW framework. So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    We are not cutting our nose off. We are (or at least I am) valuing the rights we - citizens in Britain - and I am old-fashioned enough to think they should be the priority for the British government - have to a fair trial, the right not to be arrested and locked up without a prima facie case being made, without the right to habeas corpus, the right to a trial where the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the right to a trial where the prosecution has to prove its case to a higher standard than simply the balance of probabilities, the right to a trial by one's peers, the right to a proper evidential process, rights which have been built up over centuries rather more than easing the burden on bureaucrats in foreign legal processes which do not have such rights.

    That is not immaturity. It is valuing something which is special about our legal system, a legal system which says much about how we view the relationship between individuals and the state, a relationship which is - or should be - at the heart of our political system.

    Co-operation is all very well but to value it to the extent that we undermine our own legal system and the rights it gives our citizens seems to me to be an example of political immaturity. True friends do not trample over each others' fundamental beliefs. The English legal system is a key part of English identity; it is ours. And no amount of feeling European (as I do) or wishing to co-operate with European countries (as I think we should) will make me agree to abandon important principles and checks and balances which are a key part of what makes Britain what it is.

    Bravo!!
  • welshowl said:

    As the £ continues its inexorable decline and the world outside the brexit bubble votes with its cash, my holiday in Oz this Xmas is becoming rather more costly than planned.

    New Year in Margaret River but will I be able to afford s bottle of cab sauv?

    Yes but my exported manufactured goods are getting more lucrative by the day. Nice bonus order from the Far East today ahead of when we expected, good stuff.

    I'm with Mervyn King: this is a great chance to reduce the trade deficit, reduce house prices, and raise interest rates.

    I'm currently sat in the Netherlands ( on an export sales trip ) about to have a steak at inflated prices courtesy of the £. I deeply couldn't give a monkeys as I know the benefit far outweighs the pain. Thing is it's also ultimately what the country needs as well as me.

    And you can claim it on expenses :-)

    HA SO you must be rolling in it atm - all that currency gain from overseas. :-)

    Yep, billing in dollars and Euros is pretty rewarding currently.

    I'll put you down as a Leave if there's a re-run :-)

    It's not about the wallet, though ;-)

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,571
    Cyclefree said:



    We are not cutting our nose off. We are (or at least I am) valuing the rights we - citizens in Britain - and I am old-fashioned enough to think they should be the priority for the British government - have to a fair trial, the right not to be arrested and locked up without a prima facie case being made, without the right to habeas corpus, the right to a trial where the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the right to a trial where the prosecution has to prove its case to a higher standard than simply the balance of probabilities, the right to a trial by one's peers, the right to a proper evidential process, rights which have been built up over centuries rather more than easing the burden on bureaucrats in foreign legal processes which do not have such rights.

    That is not immaturity. It is valuing something which is special about our legal system, a legal system which says much about how we view the relationship between individuals and the state, a relationship which is - or should be - at the heart of our political system.

    Co-operation is all very well but to value it to the extent that we undermine our own legal system and the rights it gives our citizens seems to me to be an example of political immaturity. True friends do not trample over each others' fundamental beliefs. The English legal system is a key part of English identity; it is ours. And no amount of feeling European (as I do) or wishing to co-operate with European countries (as I think we should) will make me agree to abandon important principles and checks and balances which are a key part of what makes Britain what it is.

    Hear hear, Cyclefree.

    If not to preserve our liberties, what precisely is Brexit for?
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158

    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
    Humble enough to predict 70/30 to Remain?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I suppose that depends on how limited your understanding of english is.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,998
    Dromedary said:

    As soon as Donald Trump tweets "The Republican Party is against me", a vacancy exists for the Republican nominee, and Rule 9 comes into play.

    That is (1) legally highly questionable and (2) practically difficult.

    Even if he does tweet something like that, it would probably be clear from the context that he regards his mandate in a Corbynesque fashion and is determined to represent Republican *voters*, if not the estblishment (which in any case he'd say had broken with him).

    Rule 9 is about filling vacancies. It doesn't say anything about declaring vacancies because a candidate has gone off-piste. There is a catch-all clause but it'd be highly contestable.

    And none of that takes state laws into account. The RNC can only fill vacancies within the context of the law. Where a candidate has been duly nominated, filing and withdrawal deadlines have passed, and the candidate has no inclination to withdraw (and is not disqualified), there will be absolutely nothing that can be done, no matter how embarrassing he might be.
  • TOPPING said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Simples.
    Also on list.
    You are also on ze list.Vot is your name.

    Don't tell him Pike.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,944

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I suppose that depends on how limited your understanding of english is.
    Oh, OK, who got elected?
  • TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    The pound fallen a further two cents today against the dollar. There doesn't seem to be a floor in sight.

    While the FTSE 100 reaches record highs. Have you asked BP whether there is a ceiling in sight?
    Sunderland voter with State pension heading to Spain for annual holiday concern about:

    a) exchange rate = high
    b) FTSE tracker = not so high
    Yeah I really want to give up the countries independence for ever for a bit more spending money on holiday.

    Some things are worth making a sacrifice for. This island making amending and repealing its own laws by an assembly that is booted out every five years and replaced by the peoples choice and interpreting those laws by a judiciary made of learned judges from this island, not ex commies from behind the iron curtain and hired in judges called Ronald McDonald from north America by countries with a lower population and size than Bedford; is one of them.

    In the abstract that sounds great. The reality, though, may be less appealing - at least to some. If you have lost your job and cannot pay your mortgage, the location and the make up of the court that decides whether company A has infringed company B's biotech patent may not be your number one priority.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I suppose that depends on how limited your understanding of english is.
    Oh, OK, who got elected?
    election also means a choice or selection, which this clearly was.
  • Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the requesting state must comply with. A requesting state, whether it is Italy or the Congo or Albania can seek extradition and the matter will be determined according to our laws. It is slow and cumbersome; it is the position which obtained before states entered into treaties to speed up the process. But in matters of criminal law, in matters pertaining to the freedoms and liberties of British citizens I value matters such as habeas corpus, the onus on the state to make out a prima facie case of an offence having been committed and the restraints which are placed on states by us having a requirement that people cannot be arrested for matters which are not crimes here rather highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might want to extradite alleged criminals from other countries, and, in practice, in the case of the EU countries, it's going to be hard to get agreement outside their existing EAW framework. So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    Lord Haw Haw spent several years on the radio telling us much the same.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    edited October 2016

    Cyclefree said:



    We are not cutting our nose off. We are (or at least I am) valuing the rights we - citizens in Britain - and I am old-fashioned enough to think they should be the priority for the British government - have to a fair trial, the right not to be arrested and locked up without a prima facie case being made, without the right to habeas corpus, the right to a trial where the burden of proof is on the prosecution, the right to a trial where the prosecution has to prove its case to a higher standard than simply the balance of probabilities, the right to a trial by one's peers, the right to a proper evidential process, rights which have been built up over centuries rather more than easing the burden on bureaucrats in foreign legal processes which do not have such rights.

    That is not immaturity. It is valuing something which is special about our legal system, a legal system which says much about how we view the relationship between individuals and the state, a relationship which is - or should be - at the heart of our political system.

    Co-operation is all very well but to value it to the extent that we undermine our own legal system and the rights it gives our citizens seems to me to be an example of political immaturity. True friends do not trample over each others' fundamental beliefs. The English legal system is a key part of English identity; it is ours. And no amount of feeling European (as I do) or wishing to co-operate with European countries (as I think we should) will make me agree to abandon important principles and checks and balances which are a key part of what makes Britain what it is.

    Hear hear, Cyclefree.

    If not to preserve our liberties, what precisely is Brexit for?
    Tremendous post from Cyclefree - as ever. Holds values above the status quo and perceived 'best we can get' - as our justice system always should.

    Mssrs Nabavi and Glenn should take note.
  • Mortimer said:

    Humble enough to predict 70/30 to Remain?

    Humble enough to adjust my prediction in the light of new information as the poll approached, and thereby humbly to make a profit. Thank you for your concern!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,112
    .

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    The pound fallen a further two cents today against the dollar. There doesn't seem to be a floor in sight.

    While the FTSE 100 reaches record highs. Have you asked BP whether there is a ceiling in sight?
    Sunderland voter with State pension heading to Spain for annual holiday concern about:

    a) exchange rate = high
    b) FTSE tracker = not so high
    Yeah I really want to give up the countries independence for ever for a bit more spending money on holiday.

    Some things are worth making a sacrifice for. This island making amending and repealing its own laws by an assembly that is booted out every five years and replaced by the peoples choice and interpreting those laws by a judiciary made of learned judges from this island, not ex commies from behind the iron curtain and hired in judges called Ronald McDonald from north America by countries with a lower population and size than Bedford; is one of them.
    How noble of you to volunteer the masses' beach holidays. In time I'm sure they will thank you.

    Meanwhile how on earth did a non-independent country ever manage to leave the EU? Don't tell me we were sovereign all along??
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,944

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I suppose that depends on how limited your understanding of english is.
    Oh, OK, who got elected?
    election also means a choice or selection, which this clearly was.
    Wriggle.
    An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office.[1]
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783


    If not to preserve our liberties, what precisely is Brexit for?

    Wasn't it something to do with boosting the careers of some rather cynical politicians?
  • Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Looks like a huge strategy error. Should have released the weekend before the election.

    Trump has now declared total war and will fight fire with fire with anything else released and Hilary has a lot of Skeletons.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I suppose that depends on how limited your understanding of english is.
    Oh, OK, who got elected?
    election also means a choice or selection, which this clearly was.
    Wriggle.
    An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office.[1]
    that's one of it's meanings. A choice is another *

    * there was is no charge for broadening your vocabulary.


  • Cyclefree said:

    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
    That is simply not true. As my post at 6:40 pm makes clear. I suggest you reread it.

    I was responding to someone who said simplistically that 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated', so I'm not sure why I should reread your excellent post of 6:40pm - the principles of which I actually agree with. It's the practicalities which are the problem.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,295

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Shouldn't a poll be compared with its previous figures, so we have to wait until those who polled before the debate and during the tapes present their next results? And how many tracking polls are you following compared to those reported here?
    Begorrah JohnO me boy, good to see you on line. How's life ?

    I'm just watching The Quiet Man on Film 4 and thinking how much it must resemble Elmbridge
    Hi Brookie,

    Thanks and plodding along OK but a little under occupied since my ignominious dethronement in May. However, should the old campaign team of Andrea, Jack W and Naughty Neil reform, restoration may be on the cards in May 2017! For a moment I thought you were watching Channel 4's National Treasure. I NEVER snogged that camel.
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    Chris said:


    If not to preserve our liberties, what precisely is Brexit for?

    Wasn't it something to do with boosting the careers of some rather cynical politicians?
    Indeed. But even if it were a side effect the granting of a vote after decades of being denied one as we were salami sliced into "Europe" was hugely welcome.
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited October 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713
    JohnO said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no diffn the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Shouldn't a poll be compared with its previous figuresorted here?
    Begorrah JohnO me boy, good to see you on line. How's life ?

    I'm just watching The Quiet Man on Film 4 and thinking how much it must resemble Elmbridge
    Hi Brookie,

    Thanks and plodding along OK but a little under occupied since my ignominious dethronement in May. However, should the old campaign team of Andrea, Jack W and Naughty Neil reform, restoration may be on the cards in May 2017! For a moment I thought you were watching Channel 4's National Treasure. I NEVER snogged that camel.
    John, glad to hear youre bearing up post those ungrateful bastards in the electorate. If you see Neil pass on my regards, we do miss his sledgehammer logic on the site.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Gotcha.

    It's the same poll as yesterday but incorporating a 3rd day of interviews that occurred post-debate

    "The new data incorporate interviews that were conducted after Sunday night's debate"
    "Among only those respondents contacted after the debate, Clinton's lead shrank to a seven point advantage in both a four-way matchup and in a head-to-head race -- reflecting the same margin that Clinton showed in a mid-September NBC/WSJ poll."

    Tada, back to where we where before the tapes.
  • welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I suppose that depends on how limited your understanding of english is.
    Oh, OK, who got elected?
    election also means a choice or selection, which this clearly was.
    Wriggle.
    An election is a formal decision-making process by which a population chooses an individual to hold public office.[1]
    "2. a public vote upon a proposition submitted."

    Secondary definitions are still definitions.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,755

    welshowl said:

    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I understand the point perfectly well.

    You can have an extradition treaty much like the EAW or the treaty we have with the US. I do not like the EAW because it excludes these two (to me) critical requirements and because it makes the (again, to me) erroneous assumption that the criminal legal and judicial systems in European countries are all much of a muchness. If we have a treaty then we have to get agreement.

    But you do not need to have an extradition treaty at all. That is the point you are missing.

    We can simply set out in English law the circumstances under which we will extradite British citizens and what conditions the reqer highly.

    The EAW makes things easier because it views the whole process as a purely bureaucratic matter. Provided the right forms are filled in correctly, a person gets arrested and shipped off regardless of any other consideration. Bureaucratic ease does not, IMO, trump the requirements of justice.

    All that is fine and dandy, but we might . So I think that anyone expecting Brexit to miraculously solve the problem of the injustices of the EAW (and the even worse injustices of the US extradition treaty) is probably going to be disappointed.
    It's all just going to be TOO HARD eh? So we might as well roll over and give in?

    No wonder you thought Remain would win. You underestimate the pride and fierce independence of the British people. It is why we chose the open sea.
    Cutting off your nose to spite your face is evidence of immaturity, not independence.
    that would sort of depend on what your values are. Since yours are your wallet you arent actually in a position to know how Leavers judge the situation.
    Quite. £ bonus aside for me, Remainers are still struggling to grasp it's not about the money.
    this was a "values" election and never the twain shall meet.
    It wasn't an election.
    I don't think it was ever really about economics. It comes down to either believing the UK will do best as a self-governing country, or it will do best as part of a bigger country.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,112
    edited October 2016
    The more the Leavers on here outline their noble vision of the future, the more, as I mentioned last night, I am reminded of the proponents of socialism. In theory will solve all the world's ills; in practice, less so.

    They are describing the country that they would like us to become, rather than the one that in all probability we will become. And very little of it has anything to do with the EU.

    Sure there will be some reclaiming of sovereignty by leaving (waiting for my home energy bills to become 5% cheaper), but of course in reality nothing will be that simple, plenty of treaties will remain (the GRA will of course not be followed too quickly by the Actual Repeal Act) plus the EU will guide us in any number of areas wherein we must participate yet will henceforth have precious little say.

    I don't want to stray too much onto pre-Referendum discussions, but the Leavers' menu of wants from leaving the EU is coming to resemble, in measurs that we are ever less likely to take, the way in which Labour promised to spend the bankers bonus tax over and over.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,985
    edited October 2016
    A question: how accurate has US presidential polling been in past elections, and did accuracy change this far out? Are some pollsters consistently better than others?

    To help answer my own question:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Two-way_race
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Two-way_contest:_Barack_Obama_vs_John_McCain
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Looks like a huge strategy error. Should have released the weekend before the election.

    Trump has now declared total war and will fight fire with fire with anything else released and Hilary has a lot of Skeletons.
    Trump is going full Bulworth.

    And why not, the GOP NeverTrump's denounced him on the eve of his debate victory.

    And NBC is showing a 7% bounce for Trump post-debate back to his mid-September numbers.
  • DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    edited October 2016

    Trump has now declared total war and will fight fire with fire with anything else released and Hilary has a lot of Skeletons

    But there comes the point of "so what?" If everyone watches him on video referring to black people as "n*ggers", and he responds by saying that the "devil" Hillary looked angrily at her husband's sexual assault victims 20 years ago, and then later she scrubbed so many emails that she ran out of bleach, in-between pinching millions from the Clinton Foundation and cackling all the way to the coven, will that get him anywhere?

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people: sexism and indeed misogyny are widely considered more acceptable than racism and white supremacism. A scumbag like Trump can imply that it's normal when men get together in locker rooms for them to boast about grabbing women's vaginas without their consent, and far from having to drop out of the race for having uttered such misogynistic crap, he manages to stay in. But he won't get away with it if he implies that whenever white people get together they sound off about "n*ggers". What's he going to say instead of "locker rooms"? That that kind of attitude is common when white people get together at robe and hood parties? Oh, don't take it too seriously, oh liberal hypocrites, because it was only a bit of a jest at a robe and hood party before the burning crosses came out - the kind of thing that happens between filming sessions during the making of any TV programme?

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,158
    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    JohnO said:

    Speedy said:

    Speedy said:

    Who cares anymore about the saga of NeverTrump.

    They where fools for not waiting for the debate and now they are adrift.
    They will probably end up on Andrew Neil's couch at some point.
    Last week you were posting with absolutely certainty that Trump would be removed from the ticket, with or without his cooperation...

    Are your sources now adrift too?
    Yes they are adrift too.

    I said that the RNC would wait for the debate, they were prudent to do so.

    Those who where not that prudent, and even bragged about it on Sunday morning, now feel shafted.
    By the way, where are these post debate polls you cited earlier that Trump has regained support?
    The morning consult poll, it shows almost no difference post-debate compared with the pre-tape situation.

    And there are very good signs of stabilization in the tracking polls that is exactly like a sharp V over their period.

    It all looks like the debate cancelled the tapes.
    So Trump is now down by around 5% just like before the tapes, instead of 11-14% in that short period on Friday till Sunday.
    Looks like a huge strategy error. Should have released the weekend before the election.

    Trump has now declared total war and will fight fire with fire with anything else released and Hilary has a lot of Skeletons.
    Trump is going full Bulworth.

    And why not, the GOP NeverTrump's denounced him on the eve of his debate victory.

    And NBC is showing a 7% bounce for Trump post-debate back to his mid-September numbers.
    7% bounce??
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    A question: how accurate has US presidential polling been in past elections, and did accuracy change this far out? Are some pollsters consistently better than others?

    I'd suggest that's the wrong question. Rather the issue is with the recent rise of controversy candidates and parties, how accurate are the pollsters in accurately reporting the strength of the unacceptables ?

    To date not so good in Europe, is the US different ?
  • TOPPING said:

    .

    TOPPING said:

    FF43 said:

    The pound fallen a further two cents today against the dollar. There doesn't seem to be a floor in sight.

    While the FTSE 100 reaches record highs. Have you asked BP whether there is a ceiling in sight?
    Sunderland voter with State pension heading to Spain for annual holiday concern about:

    a) exchange rate = high
    b) FTSE tracker = not so high
    Yeah I really want to give up the countries independence for ever for a bit more spending money on holiday.

    Some things are worth making a sacrifice for. This island making amending and repealing its own laws by an assembly that is booted out every five years and replaced by the peoples choice and interpreting those laws by a judiciary made of learned judges from this island, not ex commies from behind the iron curtain and hired in judges called Ronald McDonald from north America by countries with a lower population and size than Bedford; is one of them.
    How noble of you to volunteer the masses' beach holidays. In time I'm sure they will thank you.

    Meanwhile how on earth did a non-independent country ever manage to leave the EU? Don't tell me we were sovereign all along??
    If things EU wise staying as they are now was on offer Remain might have won. It wasnt, this was our last chance before the lock snapped shut.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,755

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.
    Trump goes beyond mere bad manners. He really is happy abusing women, Mexicans, and Muslims.
  • Sean_F said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.
    Trump goes beyond mere bad manners. He really is happy abusing women, Mexicans, and Muslims.
    Sadly so are many voters. Hopefully not enough ...
  • Dromedary said:

    Trump has now declared total war and will fight fire with fire with anything else released and Hilary has a lot of Skeletons

    But there comes the point of "so what?" If everyone watches him on video referring to black people as "n*ggers", and he responds by saying that the "devil" Hillary looked angrily at her husband's sexual assault victims 20 years ago, and then later she scrubbed so many emails that she ran out of bleach, in-between pinching millions from the Clinton Foundation and cackling all the way to the coven, will that get him anywhere?

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people: sexism and indeed misogyny are widely considered more acceptable than racism and white supremacism. A scumbag like Trump can imply that it's normal when men get together in locker rooms for them to boast about grabbing women's vaginas without their consent, and far from having to drop out of the race for having uttered such misogynistic crap, he manages to stay in. But he won't get away with it if he implies that whenever white people get together they sound off about "n*ggers". What's he going to say instead of "locker rooms"? That that kind of attitude is common when white people get together at robe and hood parties? Oh, don't take it too seriously, oh liberal hypocrites, because it was only a bit of a jest at a robe and hood party before the burning crosses came out?

    -isms -isms -isms.

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited October 2016

    A question: how accurate has US presidential polling been in past elections, and did accuracy change this far out? Are some pollsters consistently better than others?

    They vary in quality quite a lot, but fivethirtyeight.com's aggregation of them (they adust for house bias and weight according to the historical quality) has been very accurate for the last two presidential elections.

    Edit: See here:

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/
  • PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.

    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited October 2016
    RobD said:



    7% bounce??

    NBC revised their yesterday's poll numbers.
    From a Hillary lead of 14% pre-debate to a 7% Hillary lead post debate, the same as they recorded in mid-September:

    "Among only those respondents contacted after the debate, Clinton's lead shrank to a seven point advantage in both a four-way matchup and in a head-to-head race -- reflecting the same margin that Clinton showed in a mid-September NBC/WSJ poll."

    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/post-debate-poll-shows-clinton-holding-9-point-lead-over-n664541
  • Sean_F said:

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.
    Trump goes beyond mere bad manners. He really is happy abusing women, Mexicans, and Muslims.
    You are probably right. Im just having a general whinge about the left banging on about -isms all the time and boring me rigid.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,985

    A question: how accurate has US presidential polling been in past elections, and did accuracy change this far out? Are some pollsters consistently better than others?

    I'd suggest that's the wrong question. Rather the issue is with the recent rise of controversy candidates and parties, how accurate are the pollsters in accurately reporting the strength of the unacceptables ?

    To date not so good in Europe, is the US different ?
    Hmmm. An interesting point.

    And thanks to Mr Nabavi as well.
  • Speedy said:

    RobD said:



    7% bounce??

    NBC revised their yesterday's poll numbers.
    From a Hillary lead of 14% pre-debate to a 7% Hillary lead post debate, the same as they recorded in mid-September:

    "Among only those respondents contacted after the debate, Clinton's lead shrank to a seven point advantage in both a four-way matchup and in a head-to-head race -- reflecting the same margin that Clinton showed in a mid-September NBC/WSJ poll."

    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/post-debate-poll-shows-clinton-holding-9-point-lead-over-n664541
    One poll, not an average of polls. Also that's a 3.5% swing not a 7% one.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.

    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Some people have no problem with an uber abortionist being elected as potus. I do. If that makes me a reactionary I'm happy with that.
  • DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    edited October 2016

    Dromedary said:

    Trump has now declared total war and will fight fire with fire with anything else released and Hilary has a lot of Skeletons

    But there comes the point of "so what?" If everyone watches him on video referring to black people as "n*ggers", and he responds by saying that the "devil" Hillary looked angrily at her husband's sexual assault victims 20 years ago, and then later she scrubbed so many emails that she ran out of bleach, in-between pinching millions from the Clinton Foundation and cackling all the way to the coven, will that get him anywhere?

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people: sexism and indeed misogyny are widely considered more acceptable than racism and white supremacism. A scumbag like Trump can imply that it's normal when men get together in locker rooms for them to boast about grabbing women's vaginas without their consent, and far from having to drop out of the race for having uttered such misogynistic crap, he manages to stay in. But he won't get away with it if he implies that whenever white people get together they sound off about "n*ggers". What's he going to say instead of "locker rooms"? That that kind of attitude is common when white people get together at robe and hood parties? Oh, don't take it too seriously, oh liberal hypocrites, because it was only a bit of a jest at a robe and hood party before the burning crosses came out?

    -isms -isms -isms.

    Blinkers blinkers blinkers. You seriously think that my thinking is totally based on questionable ideological concepts. Really? Wait and see how long he stays in the race if an Apprentice tape does show him going on about "n*ggers".
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713
    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,112

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.

    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Some people have no problem with an uber abortionist being elected as potus. I do. If that makes me a reactionary I'm happy with that.
    They offer that as well?? I'm not even in the Uber Eats catchment area.
  • A question: how accurate has US presidential polling been in past elections, and did accuracy change this far out? Are some pollsters consistently better than others?

    I'd suggest that's the wrong question. Rather the issue is with the recent rise of controversy candidates and parties, how accurate are the pollsters in accurately reporting the strength of the unacceptables ?

    To date not so good in Europe, is the US different ?
    Serious question. How good are US pollsters compared with UK ones?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Speedy said:

    RobD said:



    7% bounce??

    NBC revised their yesterday's poll numbers.
    From a Hillary lead of 14% pre-debate to a 7% Hillary lead post debate, the same as they recorded in mid-September:

    "Among only those respondents contacted after the debate, Clinton's lead shrank to a seven point advantage in both a four-way matchup and in a head-to-head race -- reflecting the same margin that Clinton showed in a mid-September NBC/WSJ poll."

    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/post-debate-poll-shows-clinton-holding-9-point-lead-over-n664541
    One poll, not an average of polls. Also that's a 3.5% swing not a 7% one.
    Well lets see, we got the Morning Consult poll, the NBC/WSJ poll, and the tracking polls saying that we are going back to the pre-tape situation after the debate.
  • PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimes which are basically bad manners and rudeness unless taken to extremes trump everything else.

    Racism and Sexism is a vice, like smoking drinking or sex addiction. In some cases mild in other cases downright dangerous. Its due to instinctive behaviour over reason which everyone has to fight and everyone suffers failures on in one area or another.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.

    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Some people have no problem with an uber abortionist being elected as potus. I do. If that makes me a reactionary I'm happy with that.

    No, I wouldn't say it makes you a reactionary. Wanting Trump to win would, though.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    “Let me tell you something,” Huckabee said. “Here’s a little secret Megyn, a lot of these bed-wetting, hand wringing Republicans, they’re not afraid Donald Trump is going to lose. They’re scared to death he’s going to win. And if he wins he is going to mess up the neat little package of fun they have because they all play to the donor class and Donald Trump is coming to make big changes in the way that these institutions go.”

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    In all seriousness, what evidence do have that Trump is crazy?

    He's spent 50yrs in business and debated dozens of times. His style and content unimpressed you - but talking to another audience you don't like isn't insane.
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.

    So was Winston Churchill.

    It does amuse me how for liberals -ism crimr.

    Im sick to death of how the left endlessly go on about it as if even the mildest manifestation of it is the sin against the holy ghost.

    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Obama goes in January dont worry about it.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,501

    Cyclefree said:

    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
    That is simply not true. As my post at 6:40 pm makes clear. I suggest you reread it.

    I was responding to someone who said simplistically that 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated', so I'm not sure why I should reread your excellent post of 6:40pm - the principles of which I actually agree with. It's the practicalities which are the problem.
    Fair enough. I was simply making the point that I accepted that there would be consequences of choosing to do what I would prefer re extradition, and that we might not like some of those consequences. I don't think the practicalities are quite as difficult as you make out. A treaty you have signed is not an inevitability like autumn following summer. A treaty which is made can also be unmade.

    Sometimes you have to accept that simply because you value other things more.

    That's life, really. Not just politics.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,112

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

    I don't think there should be a competition for it, but your post seems to be saying that women are not at all subjugated. Perhaps not in Warwickshire, or perhaps in Warwickshire also, but certainly in many parts of the country and world.
  • Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

    Don't bite. The left see people as helpless flowers incapable of telling a bully to f*** off or knee them in the groin and want to control our lives in every detail exploiting the fact that a few people sadly are helpless flowers and a few people are nasty sods who make their lives a misery.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited October 2016
    Speedy said:

    The only legacy that Renzi will leave behind will be his new electoral law which gives a majority to anyone who wins a second round, which of course it will be the M5S.

    Who, under those circumstances, would probably implement their promise to call a referendum on returning to the lira.

    The Italian economy has scarcely grown at all, in real terms, since the country joined the Euro when it was first floated in 1999. As with the UK, Italy has structural weaknesses and it would be wrong to claim that all of its problems are rooted in things European, but being effectively trapped in a fixed, permanent exchange rate mechanism and having no independent monetary levers to pull has been disastrous for the country.

    It's arguable that Germany went into the Euro with an undervalued Mark that baked a substantial competitive advantage into its position at the outset of the single currency, and it is certainly the case that the inability to devalue leaves Italy with only two means to recover competitiveness: to increase its productivity and efficiency to levels above those of German business (a massive ask,) or to attempt an internal devaluation: job cuts, wage cuts for those still employed, a relative reduction in standards of living. It has been obliged to follow the latter course, and the resultant pressure on the tax base has left the state unable to maintain both public spending and servicing of its increasingly mountainous debts without even more borrowing - despite the fact that it runs a significant budget surplus. Italy's debt to GDP ratio now exceeds 130%, and some commentators believe that it has already entered the Grecian vortex - making an eventual default certain.

    The benefits for Italy of departing the Euro are obvious. If Italy could return to the Lira and devalue then this would boost its long-suffering export industries and might actually enable the country to return to something resembling economic growth. The country would also be free to restructure its debt in an orderly way, by simply redenominating existing Italian debt from Euros to Lira. The Bank of Italy would recover its sovereign instruments and be able to undertake QE and set interest rates to levels appropriate to the Italian economy.

    As it stands, Italy has a relatively low level of private indebtedness (and very high levels of private savings,) as well as the aforementioned budget surplus. If freed of the Euro, the country could trade a weaker currency for a large boost to competitiveness, and the ability to run a balanced budget and put that surplus to productive use. Now, all it would take is for the campaign to quit the Euro to convince 50% + 1 of those people voting that these benefits are worth the risk, and the unity of the Eurozone (along with the concept of its permanence) would be destroyed. After Brexit, does anybody believe that there is no significant prospect of this coming to pass?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713
    TOPPING said:

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

    I don't think there should be a competition for it, but your post seems to be saying that women are not at all subjugated. Perhaps not in Warwickshire, or perhaps in Warwickshire also, but certainly in many parts of the country and world.
    If you want to know what subjugation looks like meet Mrs Brooke.

    bring knee pads as you'll be kneeling a lot.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,769

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

    Don't bite. The left see people as helpless flowers incapable of telling a bully to f*** off or knee them in the groin and want to control our lives in every detail exploiting the fact that a few people sadly are helpless flowers and a few people are nasty sods who make their lives a misery.
    Don't be so hard on yourself. You're not that bad.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
    That is simply not true. As my post at 6:40 pm makes clear. I suggest you reread it.

    I was responding to someone who said simplistically that 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated', so I'm not sure why I should reread your excellent post of 6:40pm - the principles of which I actually agree with. It's the practicalities which are the problem.
    Fair enough. I was simply making the point that I accepted that there would be consequences of choosing to do what I would prefer re extradition, and that we might not like some of those consequences. I don't think the practicalities are quite as difficult as you make out. A treaty you have signed is not an inevitability like autumn following summer. A treaty which is made can also be unmade.

    Sometimes you have to accept that simply because you value other things more.

    That's life, really. Not just politics.

    Richard has more chords in celebration of the status quo than, well, Status Quo.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,769
    Mortimer said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Mortimer said:

    I'm considered enough to realise that several treaties we have do not apply the same standards of British justice to extradition. This is a poor show. Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated.

    Are you so arrogant as to accept that existing Treaties are the best we can do by our citizens?

    No, I'm humble enough to appreciate that simplistic statements (such as 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated') is not how the real world works. Unfortunately, starting from here, I don't think it's likely that there will be much change to them.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as critical of the EAW and US treaties as anyone else. But there seems to be a bizarre concept amongst some people that we can simply do what we like and tell the rest of our world - including our closest friends and neighbours - to get stuffed, with no adverse consequences.
    That is simply not true. As my post at 6:40 pm makes clear. I suggest you reread it.

    I was responding to someone who said simplistically that 'Both EAW and US extradition treaties should be repudiated', so I'm not sure why I should reread your excellent post of 6:40pm - the principles of which I actually agree with. It's the practicalities which are the problem.
    Fair enough. I was simply making the point that I accepted that there would be consequences of choosing to do what I would prefer re extradition, and that we might not like some of those consequences. I don't think the practicalities are quite as difficult as you make out. A treaty you have signed is not an inevitability like autumn following summer. A treaty which is made can also be unmade.

    Sometimes you have to accept that simply because you value other things more.

    That's life, really. Not just politics.

    Richard has more chords in celebration of the status quo than, well, Status Quo.
    4?
  • DromedaryDromedary Posts: 1,194
    edited October 2016
    The first black woman elected to the US Congress, Shirley Chisholm, who was also the first black candidate for a major party's presidential nomination (for the Democrats in 1972), said that she met far more discrimination for being a woman than for being black. Other black women politicians have said the same. Things haven't changed much on that score. People who don't get this should step back and consider. Imagine if a presidential nominee had boasted about tripping up black people rather than sexually assaulting women.
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited October 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.


    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Some people have no problem with an uber abortionist being elected as potus. I do. If that makes me a reactionary I'm happy with that.

    No, I wouldn't say it makes you a reactionary. Wanting Trump to win would, though.

    I dont though. Ive already said this morning I would vote Johnson with great regret as Trump is beyond the pale in all sorts of ways.

    Im more interested in flushing out whether he can still win and betting on it if they offer silly odds (like the 6-1 I got on brexit on June 22nd).

    The temptation to schadenfreud against sanctimonious types if he does win is bloody irresistable though.
  • TOPPING said:

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

    I don't think there should be a competition for it, but your post seems to be saying that women are not at all subjugated. Perhaps not in Warwickshire, or perhaps in Warwickshire also, but certainly in many parts of the country and world.
    Mostly the sort of cultures momentum types seem to rather like.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,755
    Dromedary said:

    The first black woman elected to the US Congress, Shirley Chisholm, who was also the first black candidate for a major party's presidential nomination (for the Democrats in 1972), said that she met far more discrimination for being a woman than for being black. Other black women politicians have said the same. Things haven't changed much on that score. People who don't get this should step back and consider. Imagine if a presidential nominee had boasted about tripping up black people rather than sexually assaulting women.

    I don't really want to play Oppression Olympics.

    There are places where women are treated terribly, but the US isn't generally one of them.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Dromedary said:

    The first black woman elected to the US Congress, Shirley Chisholm, who was also the first black candidate for a major party's presidential nomination (for the Democrats in 1972), said that she met far more discrimination for being a woman than for being black. Other black women politicians have said the same. Things haven't changed much on that score. People who don't get this should step back and consider. Imagine if a presidential nominee had boasted about tripping up black people rather than sexually assaulting women.

    I must have missed the WLM protests.
  • Jonathan said:

    Women are a far more subjugated group than black people

    ?????


    women are a majority of the population, a majority of the electorate and outperform men in education. They live longer lives, have better social networks and have had a century of improving prospects.

    In what way are they subjugated ?

    Don't bite. The left see people as helpless flowers incapable of telling a bully to f*** off or knee them in the groin and want to control our lives in every detail exploiting the fact that a few people sadly are helpless flowers and a few people are nasty sods who make their lives a misery.
    Don't be so hard on yourself. You're not that bad.
    How kind of you to say so.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    @Black Rook RE Italy


    A really intelligent and well written post, so thanks. I tried to quote it, but it is too long....but your post is excellent so I would advise others to read it below.

    From a technocratic perspective there is little I disagree with. But the EU has a much more emotional connection with the Italians that is difficult to quantify. They will be the last to leave the EU through choice.....
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,783
    edited October 2016

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.


    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Some people have no problem with an uber abortionist being elected as potus. I do. If that makes me a reactionary I'm happy with that.

    No, I wouldn't say it makes you a reactionary. Wanting Trump to win would, though.

    I dont though. Ive already said this morning I would vote Johnson with great regret as Trump is beyond the pale in all sorts of ways.

    Im more interested in flushing out whether he can still win and betting on it if they offer silly odds (like the 6-1 I got on brexit on June 22nd).

    The temptation to schadenfreud against sanctimonious types if he does win is bloody irresistable though.

    l will be very disappointed if Trump wins, it is true. I think it will be a disaster for the US and, potentially, for the rest of us too. I am happy to be considered sanctimonious for not wanting a racist to win next month.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited October 2016
    A big reason as to why Trump has cut Hillary's lead by 7% post debate according to NBC.

    Digging through their tables I see Trump jumped about 14% with GOP voters, now only about 16% of republicans are calling him to step down or are refusing to vote for him.

    Also the Tape issue has gone to a 50-50 split with all adults when choosing sides.

    NeverTrump's are screwed.

    Debate victories are still very valuable.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    tyson said:

    @Black Rook RE Italy


    A really intelligent and well written post, so thanks. I tried to quote it, but it is too long....but your post is excellent so I would advise others to read it below.

    From a technocratic perspective there is little I disagree with. But the EU has a much more emotional connection with the Italians that is difficult to quantify. They will be the last to leave the EU through choice.....

    Something about vibrancy, is it? :)
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    I doubt it will be read. It's not from a properly independent news source.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,755

    PlatoSaid said:

    619 said:

    A different perspective. Been reported on various news sources as well as the linked one:


    "Huckabee: "Bed-Wetting Republicans Scared to Death" Trump Will Win"

    He said that they're more afraid of Trump threatening "the neat little package of fun” they have going in Washington, D.C.

    http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinholcomb/2016/10/11/huckabee-bedwetting-republicans-scared-to-death-trump-will-win-n2230742

    im scared as well, having an unhinged lunatic with access to nuclear bombs
    Don't vote for Hillary then. Simples.
    I mean, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, she's a corporate shill. But if you can provide any hard evidence to support her being an unhinged lunatic I'm all ears!
    Not sure I've ever said he was crazy. However his all round behaviour, towards his rivals, towards people who drop him and most of all towards women lead me to the conclusion he is not fit for the role of POTUS.

    He is a racist. Some people don't have a problem with that.


    As I say, some people have no problem with a racist being elected the President of the United States. I do. If that makes me a disgusting liberal lefty, so be it. I can live with that.

    Some people have no problem with an uber abortionist being elected as potus. I do. If that makes me a reactionary I'm happy with that.

    No, I wouldn't say it makes you a reactionary. Wanting Trump to win would, though.

    I dont though. Ive already said this morning I would vote Johnson with great regret as Trump is beyond the pale in all sorts of ways.

    Im more interested in flushing out whether he can still win and betting on it if they offer silly odds (like the 6-1 I got on brexit on June 22nd).

    The temptation to schadenfreud against sanctimonious types if he does win is bloody irresistable though.

    l will be very disappointed if Trump wins, it is true. I think it will be a disaster for the US and, potentially, for the rest of us too. I am happy to be considered sanctimonious for not wanting a racist to win next month.

    Till recently, I thought it could be amusing if Trump won, but I don't now. We really don't his finger on the nuclear trigger.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,713
    chestnut said:
    Brexit "could" make the UK the world's largest economy within 5 years.
This discussion has been closed.