Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
Switch nation for NHS and it sounds like every Labour campaign I can remember.
And, as with Corbynite labour, 'global special interests' are just a step away from the full Adolf, as twitter response just now seems to have twigged.
Lib Dem campaign in Witney suggesting that the Conservatives are so worried they are asking for the PM to come to campaign. Has happened before but pretty unusual.
What a load of balls. Safe Tory hold.
The only way the LibDems win (which given they started at 6% would be close a miracle) would be if:
(a) turnout is at Kensington & Chelsea levels (i.e. sub 30%) (b) UKIP manages a good job of persuading Tories to vote for them so as to discourage May from backsliding on Brexit (c) The LibDems manage to motivate Greens, Labour voters (who aren't particularly pro-Corbyn in that part of the world), and Remain-er Tories to vote for them
Really, (a) is the key. Sub 30% turnout, and with UKIP polling 10%, then the LibDems only need about 9,000 votes. LIkely? Not on your nelly. Possible? Yes, probably about a 1 in 25, 1 in 30 chance.
Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
I honeatly think Trump is unaware that "global special interest" is code for Jews. He's just found a phrase he likes and ignorantly used it.
You are Ken Livingstone and I claim my Iron Cross.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
I doubt it would make much difference either way, but pulling out of the debate where she is perceived to have a weakness wouldn't look good.
Take Juppé at 2 (Ladbrokes/Betfred) Take Sarkozy at 8 (Betfair - last matched 7.2) Take Montebourg at 60s (Betfair)
Leave Hollande, Macron and Le Pen to flounder.
The latest polls have Juppé leading Sarkozy 62:38 in the second round of the Les Republicains primary, so if someone's offering me evens on him as next French President, I'll jump down their throat to take it.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
Switch nation for NHS and it sounds like every Labour campaign I can remember.
And, as with Corbynite labour, 'global special interests' are just a step away from the full Adolf, as twitter response just now seems to have twigged.
Comparing Trump with Hitler is silly. Comparing Trump with 1920s Mussolini, maybe not so silly.
Oh what total childish piffle, if you bother to read Hillary's *private* views they're very similar. Only Donald says them out loud. She's a fraud to her core. If we needed a definition of a political sociopath it's her.
Told when to smile FFS. No one likes her unless sucking up.
Take Juppé at 2 (Ladbrokes/Betfred) Take Sarkozy at 8 (Betfair - last matched 7.2) Take Montebourg at 60s (Betfair)
Leave Hollande, Macron and Le Pen to flounder.
The latest polls have Juppé leading Sarkozy 62:38 in the second round of the Les Republicains primary, so if someone's offering me evens on him as next French President, I'll jump down their throat to take it.
Bit of an outlier, but their previous poll was 58/42 so the direction of movement is towards Juppé at a time when Sarkozy is playing his strongest cards.
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were.
If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties.
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Still prefer the reply in Arkell-v-Pressdram but this is pretty close.
Have you seen the mug shots of the victim named?
I've considered this a grifter story TBH.
There's Bill Clinton's alleged son via a prostitute that's been floating about - he's black, I'm very sceptical of it all. But this is 2016 - WTF is going on?
What's going on is you keep uncritically consuming news sources without checking the primary source. Like the two Podesta e-mail shock scandals you linked to in the earlier thread with both did not say what you claimed they said.
Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
Switch nation for NHS and it sounds like every Labour campaign I can remember.
And, as with Corbynite labour, 'global special interests' are just a step away from the full Adolf, as twitter response just now seems to have twigged.
Comparing Trump with Hitler is silly. Comparing Trump with 1920s Mussolini, maybe not so silly.
Oh what total childish piffle, if you bother to read Hillary's *private* views they're very similar. Only Donald says them out loud. She's a fraud to her core. If we needed a definition of a political sociopath it's her.
Told when to smile FFS. No one likes her unless sucking up.
"The ideological basis for fascism came from a number of sources. Mussolini utilized works of Plato, Georges Sorel, Nietzsche, and the socialist and economic ideas of Vilfredo Pareto, to develop fascism. Mussolini admired Plato's The Republic, which he often read for inspiration"
Take Juppé at 2 (Ladbrokes/Betfred) Take Sarkozy at 8 (Betfair - last matched 7.2) Take Montebourg at 60s (Betfair)
Leave Hollande, Macron and Le Pen to flounder.
The latest polls have Juppé leading Sarkozy 62:38 in the second round of the Les Republicains primary, so if someone's offering me evens on him as next French President, I'll jump down their throat to take it.
Bit of an outlier, but their previous poll was 58/42 so the direction of movement is towards Juppé at a time when Sarkozy is playing his strongest cards.
True, but all the recent polls have shown decent moves towards Juppé.
Massive cheers to Jessica Ennis Hill. A better role model for modern Britain would be very hard to find. She had my vote for Spoty in 12 and 15 and will have it again this year. You were fab Jess!
And jeers to Tesco. If the anglish poond drops by more than 15%, prices are going to go up. Period. I noticed petrol was up by 2p at my local BP on the way home. This is the cost of taking back control.
We already knew that every unpopular decision would be blamed on the Leave vote, whether or not it had anything to do with it. A 10% price rise on a product made entirely within the UK has nothing at all to do with it...
You mean like UKIP and their fellow-travellers blamed everything on the EU prior to June 23rd? You'd better get used to it, it is going to get a lot lot worse.
Yes, indeed.
Most sensible people will, of course, ignore it just like they ignored that.
You wish!
I didn't say what proportion of people are sensible.
We allied with Stalin against Hitler then swiftly pivoted. It wasn't a permanent alliance.
Given a choice of Putin or Junker I know which is worse. It would make more sense to continue to ally with our EU NATO partners against a resurgent Great Bear.
Yes.
The great foreign policy question for the UK is how to secure our neighbourhood which is threatened inter alia by a resurgent, revanchist and anti-liberal Russia, and Islamic extremism.
It would be better to tackle both *with* our European partners.
But if you're one of the frothers who thinks we ought to nuke Luxembourg, you'd naturally disagree.
With our European and American partners via NATO.
Though if you're a Europhile frother who thinks we ought to walk away from the Special Relationship, you'd naturally disagree.
Didn't you realise? Brexit weakens the Special Relationship because our influence in the EU is diminished.
We are/were a voice for broadly pro-US interests in the EU - TTIP etc. But not any more.
Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
Switch nation for NHS and it sounds like every Labour campaign I can remember.
And, as with Corbynite labour, 'global special interests' are just a step away from the full Adolf, as twitter response just now seems to have twigged.
Comparing Trump with Hitler is silly. Comparing Trump with 1920s Mussolini, maybe not so silly.
Oh what total childish piffle, if you bother to read Hillary's *private* views they're very similar. Only Donald says them out loud. She's a fraud to her core. If we needed a definition of a political sociopath it's her.
Told when to smile FFS. No one likes her unless sucking up.
"The ideological basis for fascism came from a number of sources. Mussolini utilized works of Plato, Georges Sorel, Nietzsche, and the socialist and economic ideas of Vilfredo Pareto, to develop fascism. Mussolini admired Plato's The Republic, which he often read for inspiration"
It is the logical conclusion affirmed by the opening passage in the Treaty of Rome. It is no myth.
You may construe it that way. I do not. And looking at the policy of France, Germany, and the U.K. within the EU over the last decade or so - neither do they.
Happily what you construe is of only incidental interest
To quote Sir Thomas More
The world must construe according to its wits; this court must construe according to the law.
Your Brexiteering Utopia has very little chance of becoming reality. Hopefully you realise this before we 48 percenters are consigned to the Tower!
You lost.
We all lost.
Not at all. Proudest day of my life.
Disappointing to see you've bought into the Remain camp wholesale.
The way Brexit is playing out is hugely upsetting. The way May and Rudd played it last week was hugely damaging. I am very angry.
I should not have to explain to friends it's safe to visit the UK.
You can unpick virtually everything by looking at the detail; from the total non-story of marmitegate to so-called "surges" in hate crime.
I expect we have a very bumpy ride ahead of us for the next 3 years.
As for the same old Britain. Maybe. I certainly hope so. But the reality is is that's not how some people see it. And perceptions count.
The govt needs to be more careful. Rhetoric about naming and shaming companies or the "citizen of the world" soundbite need to stop.
I fully stand by my respect for you in the campaign. I am glad you are proud and happy.
Thank you for your kind words.
I agree the Government should choose its words more carefully.
There was nothing in Amber Rudd's speech about naming and shaming. Although the press was all over it I can't recall its origin.
Short of googling (what a faff!), AFAIK it was mentioned by Rudd in her subsequent radio interviews and/or briefed as such by Home Office spokespeople.
Truly regrettable. Rudd should be ashamed herself.
A consequence of the pressures on the more sensible Tories trying to survive in their party during these fevered times.
We allied with Stalin against Hitler then swiftly pivoted. It wasn't a permanent alliance.
Given a choice of Putin or Junker I know which is worse. It would make more sense to continue to ally with our EU NATO partners against a resurgent Great Bear.
Yes.
The great foreign policy question for the UK is how to secure our neighbourhood which is threatened inter alia by a resurgent, revanchist and anti-liberal Russia, and Islamic extremism.
It would be better to tackle both *with* our European partners.
But if you're one of the frothers who thinks we ought to nuke Luxembourg, you'd naturally disagree.
With our European and American partners via NATO.
Though if you're a Europhile frother who thinks we ought to walk away from the Special Relationship, you'd naturally disagree.
Didn't you realise? Brexit weakens the Special Relationship because our influence in the EU is diminished.
We are/were a voice for broadly pro-US interests in the EU - TTIP etc. But not any more.
So many Brexit delusions...
The US has sadly moved away from free trade. I'll give one thing for Obama, he genuinely is a free trader.
We allied with Stalin against Hitler then swiftly pivoted. It wasn't a permanent alliance.
Given a choice of Putin or Junker I know which is worse. It would make more sense to continue to ally with our EU NATO partners against a resurgent Great Bear.
Yes.
The great foreign policy question for the UK is how to secure our neighbourhood which is threatened inter alia by a resurgent, revanchist and anti-liberal Russia, and Islamic extremism.
It would be better to tackle both *with* our European partners.
But if you're one of the frothers who thinks we ought to nuke Luxembourg, you'd naturally disagree.
With our European and American partners via NATO.
Though if you're a Europhile frother who thinks we ought to walk away from the Special Relationship, you'd naturally disagree.
Didn't you realise? Brexit weakens the Special Relationship because our influence in the EU is diminished.
We are/were a voice for broadly pro-US interests in the EU - TTIP etc. But not any more.
So many Brexit delusions...
The US has sadly moved away from free trade. I'll give one thing for Obama, he genuinely is a free trader.
Clinton and Trump, not so much.
Well Clinton was until she needed to outflank Sanders. Hopefully in post she'll forget all that and govern according to her instincts.
Although there is an argument that the TTIP is less free trade and more a kind of extra-sovereign sop to big business.
Anyway, my point on the Special Relationship stands. It was buttressed by our influence in Europe. See British foreign policy since 1945.
Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
Switch nation for NHS and it sounds like every Labour campaign I can remember.
And, as with Corbynite labour, 'global special interests' are just a step away from the full Adolf, as twitter response just now seems to have twigged.
Comparing Trump with Hitler is silly. Comparing Trump with 1920s Mussolini, maybe not so silly.
Oh what total childish piffle, if you bother to read Hillary's *private* views they're very similar. Only Donald says them out loud. She's a fraud to her core. If we needed a definition of a political sociopath it's her.
Told when to smile FFS. No one likes her unless sucking up.
"The ideological basis for fascism came from a number of sources. Mussolini utilized works of Plato, Georges Sorel, Nietzsche, and the socialist and economic ideas of Vilfredo Pareto, to develop fascism. Mussolini admired Plato's The Republic, which he often read for inspiration"
On topic calling this a race is a bit of an overstatement at the moment. Unless the hare decides to have a particularly long nap this "race" is over and the tortoise is toast.
Will Hilary win more than 350ECVs? I would say almost certainly.
What odds are you offering?
Yes, I would also be interested in what odds you are offering - how about 5/1? I mean, surely easy money for you given the race is already over and we know who is the victor......
Well he's gone the whole Bilderberg now, I don't think he's started ranting about lizards but surely it's only a matter of time....
"This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. This will be our last chance to save it on November 8. Remember that. This election will determine whether we are a free nation or whether we have only the illusion of democracy, but we are in fact controlled by a handful of global special interests rigging the system and our system is rigged.
This is reality. "
Mad as a bag of frogs.
Switch nation for NHS and it sounds like every Labour campaign I can remember.
And, as with Corbynite labour, 'global special interests' are just a step away from the full Adolf, as twitter response just now seems to have twigged.
Comparing Trump with Hitler is silly. Comparing Trump with 1920s Mussolini, maybe not so silly.
Oh what total childish piffle, if you bother to read Hillary's *private* views they're very similar. Only Donald says them out loud. She's a fraud to her core. If we needed a definition of a political sociopath it's her.
Told when to smile FFS. No one likes her unless sucking up.
"The ideological basis for fascism came from a number of sources. Mussolini utilized works of Plato, Georges Sorel, Nietzsche, and the socialist and economic ideas of Vilfredo Pareto, to develop fascism. Mussolini admired Plato's The Republic, which he often read for inspiration"
Extract from the Wikipedia on Musso.
Plato, huh?
Figures.
Kitties round here only discuss in Latin. I can almost recall how to spell my name in Greek - but that's about 40yrs ago.
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were. If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties. It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Very plausible. We also have the example of Cameron's inadequate renegotiation where his team failed to communicate to the EU and the 27, how much needed to change to keep the UK in the EU.
Will Hilary win more than 350ECVs? I would say almost certainly.
Hrrrm, guessing that'd be 50/50 if the election was held tomorrow. But which way does it move from here? The tapes effect fades? Or does Trump's campaign implode under the pressure?
Edit: betfair has 330-359 at 3.10, and 360+ at 2.54. The latter seems a stretch - all the usual states +AZ+IA only gets it to 357, then the next beyond that is a bit of a gap (Missouri?)
Lib Dem campaign in Witney suggesting that the Conservatives are so worried they are asking for the PM to come to campaign. Has happened before but pretty unusual.
The closest that Witney could possibly be IMO is Con 45%, LD 30%. But it'll probably be more like Con 50%, LD 25%.
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
I think she'd prefer not to have the final debate.
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Maybe I had better get round to Wm Hills post haste in the morning while its still 11/2 for trump.
Lib Dem campaign in Witney suggesting that the Conservatives are so worried they are asking for the PM to come to campaign. Has happened before but pretty unusual.
The closest that Witney could possibly be IMO is Con 45%, LD 30%. But it'll probably be more like Con 50%, LD 25%.
Can't see the Tories reaching 50 at the moment in Witney. Fancy an even £20?
Lib Dem campaign in Witney suggesting that the Conservatives are so worried they are asking for the PM to come to campaign. Has happened before but pretty unusual.
The closest that Witney could possibly be IMO is Con 45%, LD 30%. But it'll probably be more like Con 50%, LD 25%.
I'd be surprised if the Conservative vote is 2x the LibDem one. But I'll be surprised the other way if it's less than 1.5x the LibDem one...
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Maybe I had better get round to Wm Hills post haste in the morning while its still 11/2 for trump.
You might want to let them drift out a bit more once they get the memo from pb.com that the race is over - you might be able to get 10/1.
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were. If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties. It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Very plausible. We also have the example of Cameron's inadequate renegotiation where his team failed to communicate to the EU and the 27, how much needed to change to keep the UK in the EU.
But there's just no attempt at winning British hearts and minds is there in that speech? It's really a latent threat "you'll suffer if you don't stay". Why on earth would they want us back? At best they are going to have a country with millions of utterly bitter cheated voters who would feel the democratic process has been stymied by a foreign power. Barring a somewhat unlikely conversion to the European cause by millions who voted Leave the EU would've become foreign oppressor plain and simple. I dread to think where that ends frankly.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
I think she'd prefer not to have the final debate.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
I think she'd prefer not to have the final debate.
The problem is that her poor sickness record will count against her if she neglects to turn up - whatever the excuse.
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
The anti-Hilary crowd have a problem in the fact there have been many false dawns: stories that they claimed would finish her have turned out to be either minor or fictitious. The only story with any currency was her collapse, and that was hardy *their* story.
Like the boy that cried wolf, any new story will be treated with a certain amount of disbelief.
The situation with Trump is different: the stories are panning out. Many Republicans believe them, and that is why a new story, even if false, might damage him.
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Maybe I had better get round to Wm Hills post haste in the morning while its still 11/2 for trump.
You might want to let them drift out a bit more once they get the memo from pb.com that the race is over - you might be able to get 10/1.
The RAS poll has trump at 24% from 12% 6 days ago. Garbage.
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
The anti-Hilary crowd have a problem in the fact there have been many false dawns: stories that they claimed would finish her have turned out to be either minor or fictitious. The only story with any currency was her collapse, and that was hardy *their* story.
Like the boy that cried wolf, any new story will be treated with a certain amount of disbelief.
The situation with Trump is different: the stories are panning out. Many Republicans believe them, and that is why a new story, even if false, might damage him.
Mmmm, not sure the American public have seen them as minor or fictitious - she has poor ratings on trust because people do not trust her on what happened re the e-mails.
I am not looking at this from a pro-Trump / anti-HRC standpoint - I am interested in the potential for winnings: in a two-horse race, and with the data that is now starting to come out post-debate, Trump looks value.
Lib Dem campaign in Witney suggesting that the Conservatives are so worried they are asking for the PM to come to campaign. Has happened before but pretty unusual.
What a load of balls. Safe Tory hold.
Can we are the bar chart for this.. just for a laugh and for posterity
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Maybe I had better get round to Wm Hills post haste in the morning while its still 11/2 for trump.
You might want to let them drift out a bit more once they get the memo from pb.com that the race is over - you might be able to get 10/1.
The RAS poll has trump at 24% from 12% 6 days ago. Garbage.
As said, you can argue about their methodology but the momentum is the key.
BTW, have you done the same in-depth analysis on those showing HRC in the lead or are they all as pure as the driven snow?
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were. If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties. It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Very plausible. We also have the example of Cameron's inadequate renegotiation where his team failed to communicate to the EU and the 27, how much needed to change to keep the UK in the EU.
My reading is a little different. He strongly implies that Article 50 notification is not irreversible.
"Of course it is and can only be for the UK to assess the outcome of the negotiations and determine if Brexit is really in their interest."
Unless an Article 50 notification is reversible, this makes no sense.
The moment angry 7ft-tall 29st Silverback gorilla Kumbuka attacks enclosure window at London Zoo before smashing through the glass and escaping as 30 armed police are called to track him down with a tranquiliser gun
Jeez...Plato is the ultimate duracell bunny..... And I don't mean bunny in a misogynist way.
Plato...can you not take an interest in a noble cause....global warming, or save the whale perhaps? You would be such a formidable campaigner. You need to pass over the Donald, just get over him...seriously...
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Maybe I had better get round to Wm Hills post haste in the morning while its still 11/2 for trump.
You might want to let them drift out a bit more once they get the memo from pb.com that the race is over - you might be able to get 10/1.
The RAS poll has trump at 24% from 12% 6 days ago. Garbage.
As said, you can argue about their methodology but the momentum is the key.
BTW, have you done the same in-depth analysis on those showing HRC in the lead or are they all as pure as the driven snow?
If a poll shows Trump with 24% ,19, 12, or even 10% with AA it is rubbish not momentum just a load of bs. But if you want to pile on be my guest. As for those showing Hillary with a lead if a poll showed her beating Trump by 10% with non college educated white men than I would also say it was crap not showing momentum one way or another. Just a really awfully sampled poll/s.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were.
If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties.
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
It certainly doesn't seem as though the Commission or Council is doing much soul searching about why one of their long standing and largest member states is leaving. If you ran a business and 15% of your staff resigned you would wonder what had happened, and you would worry that more staff might follow them. The EU on the other hand seems to be intent on ignoring our grievances and pressing on with the only answer they ever have to any problem, "more Europe".
The moment angry 7ft-tall 29st Silverback gorilla Kumbuka attacks enclosure window at London Zoo before smashing through the glass and escaping as 30 armed police are called to track him down with a tranquiliser gun
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
The anti-Hilary crowd have a problem in the fact there have been many false dawns: stories that they claimed would finish her have turned out to be either minor or fictitious. The only story with any currency was her collapse, and that was hardy *their* story.
Like the boy that cried wolf, any new story will be treated with a certain amount of disbelief.
The situation with Trump is different: the stories are panning out. Many Republicans believe them, and that is why a new story, even if false, might damage him.
Mmmm, not sure the American public have seen them as minor or fictitious - she has poor ratings on trust because people do not trust her on what happened re the e-mails.
I am not looking at this from a pro-Trump / anti-HRC standpoint - I am interested in the potential for winnings: in a two-horse race, and with the data that is now starting to come out post-debate, Trump looks value.
The trust wrt emails should already be priced in, and was probably already so before her campaign against Sanders. The contents of the emails are a different matter, and her good luck has been in Wikileaks et al handling them so ineptly (so far).
As for Trump: his biggest problem seems to be his own mouth. Given that, one has to price in the chance that he will say something in the next few weeks that will torpedo his chances. The biggest self-inflicted problem that could torpedo Hils' chances would be another collapse: she's too experienced to say anything truly bad in the next few weeks.
I'm not a better, but for those who are, being interested in the potential for winnings is always good.
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were. If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties. It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Very plausible. We also have the example of Cameron's inadequate renegotiation where his team failed to communicate to the EU and the 27, how much needed to change to keep the UK in the EU.
But there's just no attempt at winning British hearts and minds is there in that speech? It's really a latent threat "you'll suffer if you don't stay". Why on earth would they want us back? At best they are going to have a country with millions of utterly bitter cheated voters who would feel the democratic process has been stymied by a foreign power. Barring a somewhat unlikely conversion to the European cause by millions who voted Leave the EU would've become foreign oppressor plain and simple. I dread to think where that ends frankly.
Good point. But the EU bureaucrats seem to be blind to such matters.
The moment angry 7ft-tall 29st Silverback gorilla Kumbuka attacks enclosure window at London Zoo before smashing through the glass and escaping as 30 armed police are called to track him down with a tranquiliser gun
I reckon he heard about the potential Marmite shortages and decided he had to get down the shops and stock up asap....
No, he was worried about losing the protection of EU animal welfare standards, and was making a break for the Channel before the Repeal Bill gets tabled.
Lib Dem campaign in Witney suggesting that the Conservatives are so worried they are asking for the PM to come to campaign. Has happened before but pretty unusual.
The closest that Witney could possibly be IMO is Con 45%, LD 30%. But it'll probably be more like Con 50%, LD 25%.
I agree with this. David Cameron had 60% of the vote in 2015 while the Lib Dems were fourth on 7%. There may be a shift from Con to LD but that will be somewhat cancelled out by voters moving from UKIP to Con. I think the Conservatives will hold onto most of their votes while the Lib Dems may knock Labour of second place 50/25 sounds plausible t to me.
On topic, Speedy is right, the polls that have been done post-debate have shifted back to Trump:
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
The anti-Hilary crowd have a problem in the fact there have been many false dawns: stories that they claimed would finish her have turned out to be either minor or fictitious. The only story with any currency was her collapse, and that was hardy *their* story.
Like the boy that cried wolf, any new story will be treated with a certain amount of disbelief.
The situation with Trump is different: the stories are panning out. Many Republicans believe them, and that is why a new story, even if false, might damage him.
Mmmm, not sure the American public have seen them as minor or fictitious - she has poor ratings on trust because people do not trust her on what happened re the e-mails.
I am not looking at this from a pro-Trump / anti-HRC standpoint - I am interested in the potential for winnings: in a two-horse race, and with the data that is now starting to come out post-debate, Trump looks value.
The trust wrt emails should already be priced in, and was probably already so before her campaign against Sanders. The contents of the emails are a different matter, and her good luck has been in Wikileaks et al handling them so ineptly (so far).
As for Trump: his biggest problem seems to be his own mouth. Given that, one has to price in the chance that he will say something in the next few weeks that will torpedo his chances. The biggest self-inflicted problem that could torpedo Hils' chances would be another collapse: she's too experienced to say anything truly bad in the next few weeks.
I'm not a better, but for those who are, being interested in the potential for winnings is always good.
Agreed with the winnings' comment - Brexit paid for a couple of my new suits
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were.
If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties.
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
It certainly doesn't seem as though the Commission or Council is doing much soul searching about why one of their long standing and largest member states is leaving. If you ran a business and 15% of your staff resigned you would wonder what had happened, and you would worry that more staff might follow them. The EU on the other hand seems to be intent on ignoring our grievances and pressing on with the only answer they ever have to any problem, "more Europe".
TBH, I see there as being several EUs. There is the high one, based in the ideals of a unified Europe. There is a middle one: based in the concept that we can work well together as separate countries. And there is the low, practical one, where people just get on and work together.
The problem is with the hgh; the idealists and believers in a unified Europe. If it was just the middle and low ones, we'd still be in the EU.
I'm frankly surprised that Juncker has not resigned, and there has not been (as far as I know) any EU inquiry announced into what went wrong. The lack of one ushers a worrying suggestion: they don't think they did anything wrong. It isn't their problem: it's ours.
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were. If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties. It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Very plausible. We also have the example of Cameron's inadequate renegotiation where his team failed to communicate to the EU and the 27, how much needed to change to keep the UK in the EU.
But there's just no attempt at winning British hearts and minds is there in that speech? It's really a latent threat "you'll suffer if you don't stay". Why on earth would they want us back? At best they are going to have a country with millions of utterly bitter cheated voters who would feel the democratic process has been stymied by a foreign power. Barring a somewhat unlikely conversion to the European cause by millions who voted Leave the EU would've become foreign oppressor plain and simple. I dread to think where that ends frankly.
Good point. But the EU bureaucrats seem to be blind to such matters.
True. However Theresa May is equally blind to not winning hearts and minds of fellow Europeans. That's more concerning for us
The moment angry 7ft-tall 29st Silverback gorilla Kumbuka attacks enclosure window at London Zoo before smashing through the glass and escaping as 30 armed police are called to track him down with a tranquiliser gun
I reckon he heard about the potential Marmite shortages and decided he had to get down the shops and stock up asap....
No, he was worried about losing the protection of EU animal welfare standards, and was making a break for the Channel before the Repeal Bill gets tabled.
Surely he was just trying to grab some p***y. Isn't that what silverbacks do?
The biggest self-inflicted problem that could torpedo Hils' chances would be another collapse.
Now that would be funny. Not the spectre of an elderly and frail woman collapsing, you'll understand, but watching the conspiracy theorists melt down over whether it was because she was hiding something about her health or covering up something about Benghazi. That really would put pressure on world popcorn supplies!
"All the government’s bombast flows from the relatively quiet economic summer we had after the Brexit vote. Like George W. Bush, when he declared ‘mission accomplished’ after the Americans rolled into Baghdad in 2003, cocksure Tories are full of-unwarranted self-confidence. It will shatter if the pound keeps heading for parity with the euro, and a nation with huge sovereign debts finds that the Treasury’s predictions of the tax take slumping are accurate. If jobs start going, if inflation and the national debt start rising, if the bond markets turn ugly, voters will demand that MPs intervene, and the sensible majority in Parliament will be only too pleased to oblige. May will then learn that, for all our faults, we are a parliamentary democracy, and that politicians who treat parliament like Charles I risk meeting the fate of Charles I."
Not so good for trump. Mark Murray Verified account @mmurraypolitics
NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina Clinton 45% Trump 41% Johnson 9%
2-way: HRC 48%, Trump 43%
It would discourage a knowledgeable politician. He'll just put it down to media bias.
However, what does it say about HRC that after a week when her main rival has been caught making sexually explicit remarks about his 14 year old daughter, been accused of multiple sexual assaults and threatened to subvert judicial and democratic processes by locking up his political rivals, that even on a forced choice she still only leads by a piddling 5%?
It looks to me like he's hoping the EU playing hard ball may lead to UK reconsidering.
Honestly playing hard ball might be the biggest mis-reading of the British psyche since the Falklands.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were.
If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties.
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
I am not a negotiator, but isn't Mr Tusk's statement simply the obverse of Mrs May's: both sides letting the other know they're prepared to walk away?
Not so good for trump. Mark Murray Verified account @mmurraypolitics
NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina Clinton 45% Trump 41% Johnson 9%
2-way: HRC 48%, Trump 43%
It would discourage a knowledgeable politician. He'll just put it down to media bias.
However, what does it say about HRC that after a week when her main rival has been caught making sexually explicit remarks about his 14 year old daughter, been accused of multiple sexual assaults and threatened to subvert judicial and democratic processes by locking up his political rivals, that even on a forced choice she still only leads by a piddling 5%?
It says much more about how tribal politics are in the States than anything about HRC
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
The Republicans seem to blame her for the Iraq war, seems a little bit unfair.
Of course one of the notable things about the first Clinton Presidency was the peace in the world, barring a little local insanity in the South Balkans.
TBH, I see there as being several EUs. There is the high one, based in the ideals of a unified Europe. There is a middle one: based in the concept that we can work well together as separate countries. And there is the low, practical one, where people just get on and work together.
The problem is with the hgh; the idealists and believers in a unified Europe. If it was just the middle and low ones, we'd still be in the EU.
I'm frankly surprised that Juncker has not resigned, and there has not been (as far as I know) any EU inquiry announced into what went wrong. The lack of one ushers a worrying suggestion: they don't think they did anything wrong. It isn't their problem: it's ours.
(And that's as a remain voter).
I think you are correct. Maybe because we have always been somewhat outside the core of the project they will ignore us, "It's the British, not a real problem". But if they don't learn lessons and others follow it might be too late to take action that will save the EU.
I do wonder if Tusk and other high-ups in the EU are getting most of their information from pro-EU media and people within the UK. Their friends, as it were.
If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties.
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
It certainly doesn't seem as though the Commission or Council is doing much soul searching about why one of their long standing and largest member states is leaving. If you ran a business and 15% of your staff resigned you would wonder what had happened, and you would worry that more staff might follow them. The EU on the other hand seems to be intent on ignoring our grievances and pressing on with the only answer they ever have to any problem, "more Europe".
TBH, I see there as being several EUs. There is the high one, based in the ideals of a unified Europe. There is a middle one: based in the concept that we can work well together as separate countries. And there is the low, practical one, where people just get on and work together.
The problem is with the hgh; the idealists and believers in a unified Europe. If it was just the middle and low ones, we'd still be in the EU.
I'm frankly surprised that Juncker has not resigned, and there has not been (as far as I know) any EU inquiry announced into what went wrong. The lack of one ushers a worrying suggestion: they don't think they did anything wrong. It isn't their problem: it's ours.
(And that's as a remain voter).
Yup. Dead right. And good for you as a Remainer to write that.
'But there's just no attempt at winning British hearts and minds is there in that speech? It's really a latent threat "you'll suffer if you don't stay".'
But that's how the EU works,look what got dished out to Greece.
That's why I don't think a lot of time should be wasted on negotiations with them as Tusk has already confirmed that the only deal is hard Brexit. If that's confirmed by Junker & Shultz then there should be nothing on or off the table as far as the UK is concerned including any compromise on EU nationals that don't qualify under the 5 year right to remain.
Not so good for trump. Mark Murray Verified account @mmurraypolitics
NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina Clinton 45% Trump 41% Johnson 9%
2-way: HRC 48%, Trump 43%
It would discourage a knowledgeable politician. He'll just put it down to media bias.
However, what does it say about HRC that after a week when her main rival has been caught making sexually explicit remarks about his 14 year old daughter, been accused of multiple sexual assaults and threatened to subvert judicial and democratic processes by locking up his political rivals, that even on a forced choice she still only leads by a piddling 5%?
It says much more about how tribal politics are in the States than anything about HRC
I am not sure I share your pessimism (or is it optimism)? One of the curious features of this election has been how increasingly divorced parties, segments of parties and the Leadership have become. Trump only recently joined the Republicans, ditto Sanders with the Democrats. Both candidates are currently on a lower share than Romney in 2012, never mindObama, in several polls.
Moreover, the Republicans are badly divided and clearly in panic about a meltdown at congressional level, yet the Presidential vote is somehow holding up. You would have expected it to be the other way around since most recent PR disasters are very Trumpian in character.
I still think it shows a weak candidate. Anyone who fails to top 50% against Trump after the last few days has frankly demonstrated that they are no good at politics.
Not so good for trump. Mark Murray Verified account @mmurraypolitics
NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina Clinton 45% Trump 41% Johnson 9%
2-way: HRC 48%, Trump 43%
It would discourage a knowledgeable politician. He'll just put it down to media bias.
However, what does it say about HRC that after a week when her main rival has been caught making sexually explicit remarks about his 14 year old daughter, been accused of multiple sexual assaults and threatened to subvert judicial and democratic processes by locking up his political rivals, that even on a forced choice she still only leads by a piddling 5%?
It means she's a god awful candidate and if she really cared about defeating Trump she would have let Berniie win.
Mike Cernovich Why does Clinton take money from Saudis, who imprison and execute gays? Recent emails from the Wikileaks data drop shows Clinton knew Saudi Arabia sponsored terrorism.
TBH, I see there as being several EUs. There is the high one, based in the ideals of a unified Europe. There is a middle one: based in the concept that we can work well together as separate countries. And there is the low, practical one, where people just get on and work together.
The problem is with the hgh; the idealists and believers in a unified Europe. If it was just the middle and low ones, we'd still be in the EU.
I'm frankly surprised that Juncker has not resigned, and there has not been (as far as I know) any EU inquiry announced into what went wrong. The lack of one ushers a worrying suggestion: they don't think they did anything wrong. It isn't their problem: it's ours.
(And that's as a remain voter).
I think you are correct. Maybe because we have always been somewhat outside the core of the project they will ignore us, "It's the British, not a real problem". But if they don't learn lessons and others follow it might be too late to take action that will save the EU.
I was having lunch with one of my (naturalised British) Greek colleagues today. He is shifting some of his Sterling to his Greek € account, shocked at the continuing slide. It seems only yesterday that he was shifting his money the other way.
It is hard to know when to call the bottom though. I suspect around January, but who knows? It is hard to see a reason for a recovery until the uncertainty ends.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
Well there is the risk that if Trump repeats his second debate performance that it will close the gap completely.
Trump closed the gap by 9 points with the second debate victory, a repeat of that will seriously endanger Hillary's position, since she is only leading by 4.
But if she run's away it will be perceived as weakness.
You see why barring another tape, Hillary's position is exposed to risks.
Does Clinton need to do a third debate? What has she to gain? Foriegn policy is her weakest area.Benghazi, Iraq, Syria, ISIS (which she founded with Obama ofcourse). A lose lose situation.She should say he is "unfit" and pull out on behalf of the women.
The Republicans seem to blame her for the Iraq war, seems a little bit unfair.
Of course one of the notable things about the first Clinton Presidency was the peace in the world, barring a little local insanity in the South Balkans.
Clinton's second terms stands out for the number of war deaths and bucking the downward trend:
Well there is the risk that if Trump repeats his second debate performance that it will close the gap completely.
Trump closed the gap by 9 points with the second debate victory, a repeat of that will seriously endanger Hillary's position, since she is only leading by 4.
But if she run's away it will be perceived as weakness.
You see why barring another tape, Hillary's position is exposed to risks.
Comments
(a) turnout is at Kensington & Chelsea levels (i.e. sub 30%)
(b) UKIP manages a good job of persuading Tories to vote for them so as to discourage May from backsliding on Brexit
(c) The LibDems manage to motivate Greens, Labour voters (who aren't particularly pro-Corbyn in that part of the world), and Remain-er Tories to vote for them
Really, (a) is the key. Sub 30% turnout, and with UKIP polling 10%, then the LibDems only need about 9,000 votes. LIkely? Not on your nelly. Possible? Yes, probably about a 1 in 25, 1 in 30 chance.
But - as I said - I chucked a fiver on for fun.
Told when to smile FFS. No one likes her unless sucking up.
If so, there's a good chance that the negotiations could end badly for both parties.
It wouldn't surprise me, as it's clear the EU is unaware - or worse did not care - about the amount of unease about their project not just in the UK, but Europe as a whole.
Extract from the Wikipedia on Musso.
We are/were a voice for broadly pro-US interests in the EU - TTIP etc. But not any more.
So many Brexit delusions...
Figures.
Clinton and Trump, not so much.
Although there is an argument that the TTIP is less free trade and more a kind of extra-sovereign sop to big business.
Anyway, my point on the Special Relationship stands. It was buttressed by our influence in Europe. See British foreign policy since 1945.
Sounds remarkably similar to that woman in North London who had never bet before and put £100,000 on Remain at odds of 1/4.
That turned out well.
Edit: betfair has 330-359 at 3.10, and 360+ at 2.54. The latter seems a stretch - all the usual states +AZ+IA only gets it to 357, then the next beyond that is a bit of a gap (Missouri?)
(1) Suffolk on NC (actually Hillary's lead is 1.4pc , not the 2pc mentioned);
(2) On the PA Bloomberg poll with HRC ahead at +9%, the text states that Trump cut the gap post-debate on Monday or Tuesday Annoyingly, the report does not give the quantum of the shift.
(3) Rasmussen has gone from a HRC +7% lead on Monday to a +2% Trump lead today. I am not interested in how they count black men in Illinois, I am interested in that it has swung so much since Monday when they have not changed their methodology.
One other thing - the consensus on here is that Trump is the one at risk from more surprises. But how do we know there is nothing out there re Hillary? If this was Kaine vs Trump, I would be confident that there would be no nasty shocks. But Hillary, oh no....
Top William Hill investor Parvus rejects any Amaya deal
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-william-hill-amaya-parvus-idUSKCN12D2FV
Like the boy that cried wolf, any new story will be treated with a certain amount of disbelief.
The situation with Trump is different: the stories are panning out. Many Republicans believe them, and that is why a new story, even if false, might damage him.
I am not looking at this from a pro-Trump / anti-HRC standpoint - I am interested in the potential for winnings: in a two-horse race, and with the data that is now starting to come out post-debate, Trump looks value.
Remainers like me want the UK to reconsider.....Even if we invoke Article 50 bla...bla...I will never give up on the UK at the heart Europe.
BTW, have you done the same in-depth analysis on those showing HRC in the lead or are they all as pure as the driven snow?
"Of course it is and can only be for the UK to assess the outcome of the negotiations and determine if Brexit is really in their interest."
Unless an Article 50 notification is reversible, this makes no sense.
Interesting piece on the reserve currency status (or otherwise) of sterling:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/13/standard--poors-warns-on-uk-reserve-currency-status-as-brexit-ha/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3836773/Armed-keepers-chase-Gorilla-escaped-London-Zoo.html
I reckon he heard about the potential Marmite shortages and decided he had to get down the shops and stock up asap....
Plato...can you not take an interest in a noble cause....global warming, or save the whale perhaps? You would be such a formidable campaigner. You need to pass over the Donald, just get over him...seriously...
As for Trump: his biggest problem seems to be his own mouth. Given that, one has to price in the chance that he will say something in the next few weeks that will torpedo his chances. The biggest self-inflicted problem that could torpedo Hils' chances would be another collapse: she's too experienced to say anything truly bad in the next few weeks.
I'm not a better, but for those who are, being interested in the potential for winnings is always good.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/10/13/19/395C2DB000000578-3836773-image-m-43_1476384647233.jpg
https://spinninghugo.wordpress.com/2016/10/13/more-brexit-in-the-courts/
Mark Murray @mmurraypolitics 9m9 minutes ago
NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of Ohio
Trump 42%
Clinton 41%
Johnson 9%
Stein 4%
2-way: HRC 45%, Trump 45%
Mark Murray Verified account
@mmurraypolitics
NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina
Clinton 45%
Trump 41%
Johnson 9%
2-way: HRC 48%, Trump 43%
The problem is with the hgh; the idealists and believers in a unified Europe. If it was just the middle and low ones, we'd still be in the EU.
I'm frankly surprised that Juncker has not resigned, and there has not been (as far as I know) any EU inquiry announced into what went wrong. The lack of one ushers a worrying suggestion: they don't think they did anything wrong. It isn't their problem: it's ours.
(And that's as a remain voter).
Trump losing by 4 nationally, and winning Iowa and Ohio.
@robertcourts "I voted to leave - if I was elected as your MP I would ensure we got a good deal for West Oxfordshire."
FWIW I understand that Osborne's local membership also heavily lean to LEAVE.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/theresa-mays-cynical-brexit-stance-has-put-her-head-on-the-block/
VA - Clinton 46 .. Trump 43
OH - Clinton 45 .. Trump 43
NC - Clinton 46 .. Trump 42
http://www.theecps.com/
However, what does it say about HRC that after a week when her main rival has been caught making sexually explicit remarks about his 14 year old daughter, been accused of multiple sexual assaults and threatened to subvert judicial and democratic processes by locking up his political rivals, that even on a forced choice she still only leads by a piddling 5%?
(Good evening, everybody)
Landmark, Georgia
Trump 48
Hillary 42
Johnson 4
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_KEK8-LWmzhOVRSQXFzaGI1Si1sUDBvN0xpeVFhZzRTQTRR/view?usp=sharing
Which is right if Trump is losing by around 2-3 points in Florida and N.Carolina.
Of course one of the notable things about the first Clinton Presidency was the peace in the world, barring a little local insanity in the South Balkans.
Mike Cernovich
Alex Jones did more with $100,000 than anyone else in politics did with one million. https://t.co/30wTiuUE8n
'But there's just no attempt at winning British hearts and minds is there in that speech? It's really a latent threat "you'll suffer if you don't stay".'
But that's how the EU works,look what got dished out to Greece.
That's why I don't think a lot of time should be wasted on negotiations with them as Tusk has already confirmed that the only deal is hard Brexit. If that's confirmed by Junker & Shultz then there should be nothing on or off the table as far as the UK is concerned including any compromise on EU nationals that don't qualify under the 5 year right to remain.
Obviously you'll be limited to opinion polls conducted entirely on Saturday. How many of those were there?
Moreover, the Republicans are badly divided and clearly in panic about a meltdown at congressional level, yet the Presidential vote is somehow holding up. You would have expected it to be the other way around since most recent PR disasters are very Trumpian in character.
I still think it shows a weak candidate. Anyone who fails to top 50% against Trump after the last few days has frankly demonstrated that they are no good at politics.
http://election-data.co.uk/by-election-previews-13-10-16
Mike Cernovich
Why does Clinton take money from Saudis, who imprison and execute gays? Recent emails from the Wikileaks data drop shows Clinton knew Saudi Arabia sponsored terrorism.
It is hard to know when to call the bottom though. I suspect around January, but who knows? It is hard to see a reason for a recovery until the uncertainty ends.
Trump closed the gap by 9 points with the second debate victory, a repeat of that will seriously endanger Hillary's position, since she is only leading by 4.
But if she run's away it will be perceived as weakness.
You see why barring another tape, Hillary's position is exposed to risks.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300889-clinton-campaign-predicts-highest-voter-turnout-ever
Especially with young people ?
https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace-after-1945/
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0