politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is Hillary Clinton really the certainty that she now appears – the main topic in this week’s PB/Polling Matters Podcast/TV Show
On this week’s PB/Polling Matters show Keiran is joined by US elections experts Mark Gettleson from Portobello Communications and hosts of the LSE US podcast ‘The Ballpark’ Denise Baron and Chris Gilson.
The polls aren't as bad for Trump as you'd expect, but I can't see him winning, unless something awful for Clinton emerges.
He can't win surely - but does anyone think he will just melt away post the election. He is going to be a pain for as long as his health and money are ok
We'll have far fewer fatties about. This'll save the NHS.
Why save? The NHS gets an extra £350m a week, right?
No - that's how you save 350 million a week - prevention is better than cure
I couldn't help but notice how obese so many people are in my clinic, sometmes reaching the point of suicide by takeaway.
Re-introducing rationing would be the best thing that the Government could do to improve our health. Apart from only allowing bicycle or treadmill powered TV's, computors and smartphones.
Some interesting stats in here on early voting - it would be good to get some comparisons with the same stage in 2012 but, is it just me, or do Florida and North Carolina tallies look low, especially when you compare them against the total cast in 2012?
Florida Question Suggestions We'll launch a new Florida poll tonight...obviously will touch on the races for President and Senate but any specific questions or topics you'd be interested in, fire away!
Some interesting stats in here on early voting - it would be good to get some comparisons with the same stage in 2012 but, is it just me, or do Florida and North Carolina tallies look low, especially when you compare them against the total cast in 2012?
Some interesting stats in here on early voting - it would be good to get some comparisons with the same stage in 2012 but, is it just me, or do Florida and North Carolina tallies look low, especially when you compare them against the total cast in 2012?
We'll have far fewer fatties about. This'll save the NHS.
Why save? The NHS gets an extra £350m a week, right?
No - that's how you save 350 million a week - prevention is better than cure
I couldn't help but notice how obese so many people are in my clinic, sometmes reaching the point of suicide by takeaway.
Re-introducing rationing would be the best thing that the Government could do to improve our health. Apart from only allowing bicycle or treadmill powered TV's, computors and smartphones.
Obese people everywhere and no more so than at the school gates waiting for their children often smoking. The problem is 'huge' !!
Florida Question Suggestions We'll launch a new Florida poll tonight...obviously will touch on the races for President and Senate but any specific questions or topics you'd be interested in, fire away!
The LA Times poll is getting some flak after the article by Nate Cohn but worth taking a look at their explanation as to why they have been out of kilter:
(1) According to their explanation, it was very accurate in 2012 on the popular vote (a predicted 3.32% Obama win vs 3.85% actual) and is using the same methodology again.
(2) To Nunu, 619, Alastair et al, you might not want to look at their reasoning on "shy Trump" - essentially they take the Plato line:
"Why? (to the question why they contact the same people every day and not chooses a different demographic)
One of the problems polls face is that sometimes partisans on one side are more enthusiastic about responding to questions than those on the other side. Maybe their candidate has had a particularly good week or the opposing candidate has had a bad one. When that happens, polls can suddenly shift simply because of who is willing to respond to a pollster’s call. That problem, called differential response, has been well-documented. By using a panel of the same people, we can ensure that when the poll results change, that shift reflects individuals changing their minds.
Some interesting stats in here on early voting - it would be good to get some comparisons with the same stage in 2012 but, is it just me, or do Florida and North Carolina tallies look low, especially when you compare them against the total cast in 2012?
Some interesting stats in here on early voting - it would be good to get some comparisons with the same stage in 2012 but, is it just me, or do Florida and North Carolina tallies look low, especially when you compare them against the total cast in 2012?
Some interesting stats in here on early voting - it would be good to get some comparisons with the same stage in 2012 but, is it just me, or do Florida and North Carolina tallies look low, especially when you compare them against the total cast in 2012?
We'll have far fewer fatties about. This'll save the NHS.
Why save? The NHS gets an extra £350m a week, right?
No - that's how you save 350 million a week - prevention is better than cure
I couldn't help but notice how obese so many people are in my clinic, sometmes reaching the point of suicide by takeaway.
Re-introducing rationing would be the best thing that the Government could do to improve our health. Apart from only allowing bicycle or treadmill powered TV's, computors and smartphones.
Obesity is a problem of prosperity, just as malnutrition is one of poverty. I read that, for a time, the world's healthiest society was Dominica, in the late 20th century, where a combination of hard agricultural labour, combined with huge improvements in diet and healthcare, produced a very hardy and long-lived population.
I see Tyson has posted yet another personal attack on the previous thread describing me as 'disgusting and abhorrent' for expressing a considered view on the legal abortion limit a few weeks ago.
Obesity is a problem of prosperity, just as malnutrition is one of poverty. I read that, for a time, the world's healthiest society was Dominica, in the late 20th century, where a combination of hard agricultural labour, combined with huge improvements in diet and healthcare, produced a very hardy and long-lived population.
It's not just prosperity, though: there is after all a very strong negative correlation in Western societies between obesity and household income. Something else is going on.
The LA Times poll is getting some flak after the article by Nate Cohn but worth taking a look at their explanation as to why they have been out of kilter:
(1) According to their explanation, it was very accurate in 2012 on the popular vote (a predicted 3.32% Obama win vs 3.85% actual) and is using the same methodology again.
(2) To Nunu, 619, Alastair et al, you might not want to look at their reasoning on "shy Trump" - essentially they take the Plato line:
"Why? (to the question why they contact the same people every day and not chooses a different demographic)
One of the problems polls face is that sometimes partisans on one side are more enthusiastic about responding to questions than those on the other side. Maybe their candidate has had a particularly good week or the opposing candidate has had a bad one. When that happens, polls can suddenly shift simply because of who is willing to respond to a pollster’s call. That problem, called differential response, has been well-documented. By using a panel of the same people, we can ensure that when the poll results change, that shift reflects individuals changing their minds.
I've never said there isn't a shy Trump vote or more likely a paranoid Trump vote who don't trust any establishment figure including pollsters. I firmly believed there is one. But the question is how big is it?
I see Tyson has posted yet another personal attack on the previous thread describing me as 'disgusting and abhorrent' for expressing a considered view on the legal abortion limit a few weeks ago.
New post debate state poll, it's an internal poll for Cortez Masto in Nevada but anyway:
Hillary 47 Trump 43
Trump and Hillary tied with Favorables but Trump losing by 4 because although 41% of 18-29 have a favourale opinion of Trump he gets only 26% of their vote.
Obesity is a problem of prosperity, just as malnutrition is one of poverty. I read that, for a time, the world's healthiest society was Dominica, in the late 20th century, where a combination of hard agricultural labour, combined with huge improvements in diet and healthcare, produced a very hardy and long-lived population.
It's not just prosperity, though: there is after all a very strong negative correlation in Western societies between obesity and household income. Something else is going on.
It's strange. Poorer people in rich societies are more liken than average to be obese, but it is only in rich societies. In poor societies, only the rich are fat,
On topic, I suspect major renegotiations with large suppliers on price with big supermarkets happen all the time.
This one is news because of Brexit and the currency drop. The worst thing that happens is that the supermarket takes a profit haircut, Unilever does or we pay a bit more for the product.
Rationing isn't going to happen, expect naturally and very modestly through the price mechanism.
Anecdote alert, but one thing that's really striking me about this Presidential Election is there's virtually no sign of it on the ground where I live (Westchester County, New York). At this point in 2012 there were a fair few Obama and Romney yard signs around (more Obama than Romney, which would be expected as this is a pretty D-leaning area. Quite a few bumper stickers too which tended a bit more to equality.
This time, I've only seen two yard signs for the Presidential campaign in my area, both for Clinton. Seen a couple of Trump signs further upstate a month or so ago. Virtually no bumper stickers to be seen either, a few for Clinton, slightly fewer for Trump - there are still more Sanders stickers from the primaries to be seen!
Yet there is activity in my area - a crop of yard signs for the local state senate race appeared lately. It's very odd.
Anecdote alert, but one thing that's really striking me about this Presidential Election is there's virtually no sign of it on the ground where I live (Westchester County, New York). At this point in 2012 there were a fair few Obama and Romney yard signs around (more Obama than Romney, which would be expected as this is a pretty D-leaning area. Quite a few bumper stickers too which tended a bit more to equality.
This time, I've only seen two yard signs for the Presidential campaign in my area, both for Clinton. Seen a couple of Trump signs further upstate a month or so ago. Virtually no bumper stickers to be seen either, a few for Clinton, slightly fewer for Trump - there are still more Sanders stickers from the primaries to be seen!
Yet there is activity in my area - a crop of yard signs for the local state senate race appeared lately. It's very odd.
Two unappealing candidates = low turnout election, even by American standards?
On topic, I suspect major renegotiations with large suppliers on price with big supermarkets happen all the time.
This one is news because of Brexit and the currency drop. The worst thing that happens is that the supermarket takes a profit haircut, Unilever does or we pay a bit more for the product.
Rationing isn't going to happen, expect naturally and very modestly through the price mechanism.
I've found Tesco online to be terrible for months. "Avaliability" is always poor.
Salisbury's tends to be very good. Asda and Morrisons somewhere in the middle.
Obesity is a problem of prosperity, just as malnutrition is one of poverty. I read that, for a time, the world's healthiest society was Dominica, in the late 20th century, where a combination of hard agricultural labour, combined with huge improvements in diet and healthcare, produced a very hardy and long-lived population.
It's not just prosperity, though: there is after all a very strong negative correlation in Western societies between obesity and household income. Something else is going on.
Indeed there is quite a marked inverse ratio in obesity rates in developed countries by class; but in less developed countries the ratio is the other way. Obesity rates are actually very high in urban areas world wide.
Mostly they relate to the affordability and availability of processed, junk and fast food. These are overconsumed by poor people in rich countries and rich people in poor countries:
We are only 27th in the league table of obesity. Even Australia and NZ beat us, as well as a variety of middle income countries:
On topic, I suspect major renegotiations with large suppliers on price with big supermarkets happen all the time.
This one is news because of Brexit and the currency drop. The worst thing that happens is that the supermarket takes a profit haircut, Unilever does or we pay a bit more for the product.
Rationing isn't going to happen, expect naturally and very modestly through the price mechanism.
I've found Tesco online to be terrible for months. "Avaliability" is always poor.
Salisbury's tends to be very good. Asda and Morrisons somewhere in the middle.
I think Tesco is awful. I go in there only when there is no alternative.
Anecdote alert, but one thing that's really striking me about this Presidential Election is there's virtually no sign of it on the ground where I live (Westchester County, New York). At this point in 2012 there were a fair few Obama and Romney yard signs around (more Obama than Romney, which would be expected as this is a pretty D-leaning area. Quite a few bumper stickers too which tended a bit more to equality.
This time, I've only seen two yard signs for the Presidential campaign in my area, both for Clinton. Seen a couple of Trump signs further upstate a month or so ago. Virtually no bumper stickers to be seen either, a few for Clinton, slightly fewer for Trump - there are still more Sanders stickers from the primaries to be seen!
Yet there is activity in my area - a crop of yard signs for the local state senate race appeared lately. It's very odd.
Two unappealing candidates = low turnout election, even by American standards?
More like no money or effort is being spent in New York state.
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
I see Tyson has posted yet another personal attack on the previous thread describing me as 'disgusting and abhorrent' for expressing a considered view on the legal abortion limit a few weeks ago.
I see Tyson has posted yet another personal attack on the previous thread describing me as 'disgusting and abhorrent' for expressing a considered view on the legal abortion limit a few weeks ago.
Surely some mistake, Tyson doesn't make personal attacks does he?
The LA Times poll is getting some flak after the article by Nate Cohn but worth taking a look at their explanation as to why they have been out of kilter:
(1) According to their explanation, it was very accurate in 2012 on the popular vote (a predicted 3.32% Obama win vs 3.85% actual) and is using the same methodology again.
(2) To Nunu, 619, Alastair et al, you might not want to look at their reasoning on "shy Trump" - essentially they take the Plato line:
"Why? (to the question why they contact the same people every day and not chooses a different demographic)
One of the problems polls face is that sometimes partisans on one side are more enthusiastic about responding to questions than those on the other side. Maybe their candidate has had a particularly good week or the opposing candidate has had a bad one. When that happens, polls can suddenly shift simply because of who is willing to respond to a pollster’s call. That problem, called differential response, has been well-documented. By using a panel of the same people, we can ensure that when the poll results change, that shift reflects individuals changing their minds.
I've never said there isn't a shy Trump vote or more likely a paranoid Trump vote who don't trust any establishment figure including pollsters. I firmly believed there is one. But the question is how big is it?
Sorry, Nunu, I was trying to say it tongue in cheek but I obviously phrased it badly, apologies.
I'm surprised at the few comments re Wikileaks. It's been top trend on Facebook for large chunk of today and some really awkward and embarrassing nuggets. Much egg on lots of media faces. I note that Operation Squirrel is on Indy front page.
This time, I've only seen two yard signs for the Presidential campaign in my area, both for Clinton. Seen a couple of Trump signs further upstate a month or so ago. Virtually no bumper stickers to be seen either, a few for Clinton, slightly fewer for Trump - there are still more Sanders stickers from the primaries to be seen!
Same story in California where I am at the moment. The few posters you see are more likely to be for Bernie. Not much other evidence of an election taking place.
The LA Times poll is getting some flak after the article by Nate Cohn but worth taking a look at their explanation as to why they have been out of kilter:
I first had my suspicions about the poll due to the way the black and male sub groups seemed to move in sync. Pulpstar told me not to worry about sub samples but the correlation is striking.
Cohn's argument is highly persuasive to me. Look how simultaneously the Black and Male move in sync. One Black Trump voting dude is massively over-weighted. You can even see the echo in the 18-34 group.
He is the shy Trumper that other polls are not reaching.
I see Tyson has posted yet another personal attack on the previous thread describing me as 'disgusting and abhorrent' for expressing a considered view on the legal abortion limit a few weeks ago.
There is a super programme on BBC4 at the moment about Breguet's watch for Marie Antoinette. A watch which was to have "all the complications" - and took 44 yrs to make. Nicholas Parsons is presenting it, sounding wonderful still but looking painfully frail...
The LA Times poll is getting some flak after the article by Nate Cohn but worth taking a look at their explanation as to why they have been out of kilter:
I first had my suspicions about the poll due to the way the black and male sub groups seemed to move in sync. Pulpstar told me not to worry about sub samples but the correlation is striking.
Cohn's argument is highly persuasive to me. Look how simultaneously the Black and Male move in sync. One Black Trump voting dude is massively over-weighted. You can even see the echo in the 18-34 group.
He is the shy Trumper that other polls are not reaching.
I get that and I read the Cohn article, and see where he is coming from. My question would be that, if they are using the same methodology as they did back in 2012, then is this problem something entirely new or just that people did not pick it up in 2012? And, if the latter, did they just get lucky with their prediction for Obama's vote?
That's actually extremely good news - a very handy negotiating card. In the absence of any agreement with out EU friends, the payments automatically stop two years to the day after Mrs May pulls the Article 50 trigger.
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
Is there such a convention? And is the exercise of Article 50 a major treaty change (as opposed to the exercise of a right contained in a treaty?). And if the Commons were to vote in favour of Article 50, what fresh argument would he then deploy?
One problem with judging this election - one way or the other - is I have a problem with some of the methodology which does not seem right. For example, I looked today, the Ipsos National +7 for Clinton nd the Flordia +3% HRC poll.
On the Ipsos national poll, it had a weighting of 47% Democrats, 31% Republican and 12% Independent, with Strong Democrats nearly x2 Strong Republicans (17% v 10%). Does that sound right on a national basis? Maybe it is but it looks odd and, given that Trump is leading amongst Independent Likely Voters in that poll (32%-24%), the weighting is critical.
On the Florida Opinion Survey poll, of the 533 people they polled, apparently 91% had watched the debate vs. c. 25% of the adult population who watched it live: presumably, more watched it online but not that many.
Is there such a convention? And is the exercise of Article 50 a major treaty change (as opposed to the exercise of a right contained in a treaty?). And if the Commons were to vote in favour of Article 50, what fresh argument would he then deploy?
It's hard to see how it can possibly be described as a 'major treaty change'. Which treaty does Dominic Grieve think it changes?
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
Quite worrying how MPs don't seem to have grasped that they voted for exercise of article 50 when they agreed the treaty of Lisbon in March 2008.
The LA Times poll is getting some flak after the article by Nate Cohn but worth taking a look at their explanation as to why they have been out of kilter:
I first had my suspicions about the poll due to the way the black and male sub groups seemed to move in sync. Pulpstar told me not to worry about sub samples but the correlation is striking.
Cohn's argument is highly persuasive to me. Look how simultaneously the Black and Male move in sync. One Black Trump voting dude is massively over-weighted. You can even see the echo in the 18-34 group.
He is the shy Trumper that other polls are not reaching.
I get that and I read the Cohn article, and see where he is coming from. My question would be that, if they are using the same methodology as they did back in 2012, then is this problem something entirely new or just that people did not pick it up in 2012? And, if the latter, did they just get lucky with their prediction for Obama's vote?
I am hoping Cohn would do the same for 2012 to see if there where any outlandish weightings from the last time round. If not I will hopefully find the time to do so.
As you increase the number of small group you increase the chance of freak outliers. They may have got lucky and not had any explosive weightings affecting their results last time round.
There is a super programme on BBC4 at the moment about Breguet's watch for Marie Antoinette. A watch which was to have "all the complications" - and took 44 yrs to make. Nicholas Parsons is presenting it, sounding wonderful still but looking painfully frail...
Mind you, afaic sounding as bright as a button is definitely the better deal in the aging bargain.
Much prefer automatic to battery watches, hadn't realised they had quite such a long history.
Is there such a convention? And is the exercise of Article 50 a major treaty change (as opposed to the exercise of a right contained in a treaty?). And if the Commons were to vote in favour of Article 50, what fresh argument would he then deploy?
It's hard to see how it can possibly be described as a 'major treaty change'. Which treaty does Dominic Grieve think it changes?
The treaties of Rome, Maastricht, Amsterdam and Lisbon by setting in course the process of withdrawing from them.
David Davis unveils post-A50 plan to take back control of the food supply:
Is there a food shortage?
If the British government is going to take back control of things there will certainly be shortages of them.
We have butter shortages in Japan, because the government controls imports. Sometimes all the shops run out of butter. The British government is even less competent than the Japanese government, so yes, this will happen.
There is a super programme on BBC4 at the moment about Breguet's watch for Marie Antoinette. A watch which was to have "all the complications" - and took 44 yrs to make. Nicholas Parsons is presenting it, sounding wonderful still but looking painfully frail...
Was on iplayer last week. Wait to the end when you see Nicholas holding the watch (although at this second that may still be a spoiler).
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
Quite worrying how MPs don't seem to have grasped that they voted for exercise of article 50 when they agreed the treaty of Lisbon in March 2008.
The text they ratified includes the words 'in accordance with its own constitutional requirements', not, 'whenever the unelected Prime Minister is in the right mood'.
The treaties of Rome, Maastricht, Amsterdam and Lisbon by setting in course the process of withdrawing from them.
Article 50 is a provision of the Lisbon Treaty, which supersedes and incorporates all the previous treaties. None of them would be changed. Quite the opposite - we would, as Sean Fear says, simply be exercising a mechanism in the treaty. No sentient being could possibly honestly believe that invoking a provision of a treaty is a major change to it.
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
Quite worrying how MPs don't seem to have grasped that they voted for exercise of article 50 when they agreed the treaty of Lisbon in March 2008.
The text they ratified includes the words 'in accordance with its own constitutional requirements', not, 'whenever the unelected Prime Minister is in the right mood'.
Indeed. Our own conditional requirements are very loose, and prerogative power of the executive sovereign.
Remainers should Suck this one up. As with the vote itself, by trying to win every battle they're losing the war.
Christ alive, a thread header about polling in the US Presidential Election and already we're into the same tedious argument about triggering Article 50 that can be found under every thread for the last 3 months.
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
Quite worrying how MPs don't seem to have grasped that they voted for exercise of article 50 when they agreed the treaty of Lisbon in March 2008.
It's the irony of this. The Lisbon Treaty gives all the power over article 50 to the members of the council of ministers, which only the PM is a member.
Am I missing something? Wouldn't someone like unilever have currency swaps to ameliorate currency fluctuations??
Unilever is a worldwide consumer goods company that generates most of its earnings elsewhere, and has done very well in emerging markets in particular.
Just the sort of company that free trading Brexiteers should be cheering...
Comments
Oh and first, unless Robert intervenes, again
next.
Re-introducing rationing would be the best thing that the Government could do to improve our health. Apart from only allowing bicycle or treadmill powered TV's, computors and smartphones.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/data-points/over-500-000-votes-have-already-been-cast-2016-presidential-n665196
Clinton is in real trouble now, with all those shy trumpers in PA pretending to be Dems
October 12, 2016
Florida Question Suggestions
We'll launch a new Florida poll tonight...obviously will touch on the races for President and Senate but any specific questions or topics you'd be interested in, fire away!
Can everyone please tweet PPP about asking a question why two thirds of Americans think the country is the wrong direction please. All the polls show this but none of them elaborate. Much appreciated.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/10/florida-question-suggestions.html
It's been top trend on Facebook for large chunk of today and some really awkward and embarrassing nuggets.
Much egg on lots of media faces. I note that Operation Squirrel is on Indy front page.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-poll-faq-20161006-snap-story.html
Two points struck me:
(1) According to their explanation, it was very accurate in 2012 on the popular vote (a predicted 3.32% Obama win vs 3.85% actual) and is using the same methodology again.
(2) To Nunu, 619, Alastair et al, you might not want to look at their reasoning on "shy Trump" - essentially they take the Plato line:
"Why? (to the question why they contact the same people every day and not chooses a different demographic)
One of the problems polls face is that sometimes partisans on one side are more enthusiastic about responding to questions than those on the other side. Maybe their candidate has had a particularly good week or the opposing candidate has had a bad one. When that happens, polls can suddenly shift simply because of who is willing to respond to a pollster’s call. That problem, called differential response, has been well-documented. By using a panel of the same people, we can ensure that when the poll results change, that shift reflects individuals changing their minds.
The short story is Dem and Independent early voting up a bit. Republican early voting down a lot.
Historically Republicans favour postal votes, Dems in person early voting.
Not even available on the BetFair state betting market.
You are honest but I find your desire to see him elected to sock it NATO and seek reproachment with Putin's Russia downright bizarre.
Trump Senior Adviser Promotes Trump Endorsement From Leading Anti-Semitic Hate Site
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/10/11/trump-senior-adviser-promotes-trump-endorsement-leading-anti-semitic-hate-site/213756
Hillary 47
Trump 43
Trump and Hillary tied with Favorables but Trump losing by 4 because although 41% of 18-29 have a favourale opinion of Trump he gets only 26% of their vote.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_NV_101216.pdf
But NeverTrump Joe Heck is screwed as predicted.
Heck rejecting Trump makes you more or less likely to vote for him:
Less Likely 34%
More Likely 19%
No difference 45%
So Heck is now also losing his Senate battle because he renouned Trump.
This one is news because of Brexit and the currency drop. The worst thing that happens is that the supermarket takes a profit haircut, Unilever does or we pay a bit more for the product.
Rationing isn't going to happen, expect naturally and very modestly through the price mechanism.
This time, I've only seen two yard signs for the Presidential campaign in my area, both for Clinton. Seen a couple of Trump signs further upstate a month or so ago. Virtually no bumper stickers to be seen either, a few for Clinton, slightly fewer for Trump - there are still more Sanders stickers from the primaries to be seen!
Yet there is activity in my area - a crop of yard signs for the local state senate race appeared lately. It's very odd.
Salisbury's tends to be very good. Asda and Morrisons somewhere in the middle.
Mostly they relate to the affordability and availability of processed, junk and fast food. These are overconsumed by poor people in rich countries and rich people in poor countries:
We are only 27th in the league table of obesity. Even Australia and NZ beat us, as well as a variety of middle income countries:
http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/29-most-obese-countries-in-the-world.html
Is not the convention very clearly established that a major treaty change has to be triggered by an affirmative resolution of the House? The fact that that may only be a convention is still something that must be respected. After all, there are lots of conventions, such as the convention that a Government resign if they lose a vote of no confidence. That is no more than a convention, but Members might be a bit surprised if a Government were not to go in those circumstances.
Cohn's argument is highly persuasive to me. Look how simultaneously the Black and Male move in sync. One Black Trump voting dude is massively over-weighted. You can even see the echo in the 18-34 group.
He is the shy Trumper that other polls are not reaching.
This is the problem with rolling 24hr news. Everything is so much more magnified.
The country has to live in a perpetual state of crisis because otherwise it would make 90% of their "output" pointless (which it is)
sorry 'bout that.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/food/article-3023880/One-Midlands-factory-makes-world-s-Marmite-intrepid-reporter-loathes-stuff-astonished-there.html
UK faces Brexit divorce bill of up to €20bn
Unpaid budget appropriations, pension liabilities and other commitments make up total
https://www.ft.com/content/3c1eb988-9081-11e6-a72e-b428cb934b78
On the Ipsos national poll, it had a weighting of 47% Democrats, 31% Republican and 12% Independent, with Strong Democrats nearly x2 Strong Republicans (17% v 10%). Does that sound right on a national basis? Maybe it is but it looks odd and, given that Trump is leading amongst Independent Likely Voters in that poll (32%-24%), the weighting is critical.
On the Florida Opinion Survey poll, of the 533 people they polled, apparently 91% had watched the debate vs. c. 25% of the adult population who watched it live: presumably, more watched it online but not that many.
As you increase the number of small group you increase the chance of freak outliers. They may have got lucky and not had any explosive weightings affecting their results last time round.
Much prefer automatic to battery watches, hadn't realised they had quite such a long history.
We have butter shortages in Japan, because the government controls imports. Sometimes all the shops run out of butter. The British government is even less competent than the Japanese government, so yes, this will happen.
Insight West, National
Hillary 42
Trump 37
Johnson 6
Stein 2
http://www.insightswest.com/news/clinton-leads-trump-republicans-reject-changing-their-nominee/
Remainers should Suck this one up. As with the vote itself, by trying to win every battle they're losing the war.
http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2016/10/us-2016-polls-getting-wrong.html/
The Lisbon Treaty gives all the power over article 50 to the members of the council of ministers, which only the PM is a member.
Just the sort of company that free trading Brexiteers should be cheering...
:-)