"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."
Excellent piece. Cohen is establishing himself as the outstanding polemicist of the Brexit era. Of course, because he's also an outspoken critic of Corbyn and Islamism, it makes it harder for the Brexit hard-right to dismiss him as a Bolshevik agitator.
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:
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.
Trump criticised Bill for intervening against Sarbia.
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:
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
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.
Trump criticised Bill for intervening against Sarbia.
"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."
Could damage Clinton's chances between now and election:
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
Could damage Trump's chances:
i) more sexual abuse allegations against Trump, or more evidence
ii) a tape from the Apprentice showing him using the "N-word"
iii) evidence of contacts with Russian intelligence
iv) the Trump Foundation charity case in the state of New York [3]
v) the New York Times sticks the boot in [4] (this overlaps with the above four points)
Probably a red herring:
* anything to do with Wikileaks
Something that hasn't played much of a role recently:
* Benghazi [5]
Notes
1) It's interesting that Trump is running an ad focused on Clinton's physical weakness. Is this desperation or do they have good intelligence? Footage of a near-collapse between now and the election similar to the footage on 11 September could hand Trump victory.
2) Trump made an error by holding the press conference before the second debate. That tipped off the organisers as to what he was up to, and they stopped the alleged victims entering his family box and then confronting Bill Clinton. Had the confrontation occurred, that would have been the big debate story.
3) Remember the charity case. Documents have been ordered to be submitted by 18 Oct. Trump's Foundation is likely to be accused of fraud - calling itself a charity to collect money while not having registered as a charity in the state.
4) Given that he's threatening to sue the NYT and blew his "America First" dogwhistle during today's Florida speech, the NYT beating the crap out of him seems likely.
5) The final debate is supposed to be on foreign policy. There has been talk of Clinton not turning up, which I think would be a mistake.
That number for Florida actually doesn't look that impressive given the demographics - the article states that "1 in 3 absentee ballot requests over the past week were from African-American or Hispanic voters" but over 40% of Florida's population is Hispanic or Black, so they would seem to be trending below what they should be: http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/12
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
Could damage Clinton's chances between now and election:
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
That number for Florida actually doesn't look that impressive given the demographics - the article states that "1 in 3 absentee ballot requests over the past week were from African-American or Hispanic voters" but over 40% of Florida's population is Hispanic or Black, so they would seem to be trending below what they should be: http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/12
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
It is only guesswork and instinct, of course, but we may have bottomed for the time being. Until there is some news I suspect we'll bump along at around the current level, there may even be some recovery whilst things are quiet. The autumn statement will be critical for confidence, since the government hasn't yet replaced the 'long-term economic plan' with anything, and of course in the New Year there'll be endless speculation in the lead up to A50. Both of these events if mishandled could easily see big further falls.
So we are back to the state of affairs before the Tape.
Trump losing by 4 nationally, and winning Iowa and Ohio.
yes I think this is most likely result in the end plus Hillary winning N.carolina aswell.
North Carolina is tricky because of all the state-specific issues around transgender bathrooms and the boycotts by companies plus the fatal police shootings. Hard to know how it falls.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
Could damage Clinton's chances between now and election:
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
I hate to say it but:
d) a terrorist attack
You're right! I'd forgotten that. There's also
e) a flare-up between US and Russian forces in or near Syria
It could be argued that that would benefit Clinton, because of the perceived Trump-Putin link, but I think Trump's positioning as an aggressive nationalist with a lot of support among service personnel would make it advantageous for him, not for his opponent. That is assuming he handled it well.
Could damage Clinton's chances between now and election:
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
Could damage Trump's chances:
i) more sexual abuse allegations against Trump, or more evidence
ii) a tape from the Apprentice showing him using the "N-word"
iii) evidence of contacts with Russian intelligence
iv) the Trump Foundation charity case in the state of New York [3]
v) the New York Times sticks the boot in [4] (this overlaps with the above four points)
Probably a red herring:
* anything to do with Wikileaks
Something that hasn't played much of a role recently:
* Benghazi [5]
Notes
1) It's interesting that Trump is running an ad focused on Clinton's physical weakness. Is this desperation or do they have good intelligence? Footage of a near-collapse between now and the election similar to the footage on 11 September could hand Trump victory.
2) Trump made an error by holding the press conference before the second debate. That tipped off the organisers as to what he was up to, and they stopped the alleged victims entering his family box and then confronting Bill Clinton. Had the confrontation occurred, that would have been the big debate story.
3) Remember the charity case. Documents have been ordered to be submitted by 18 Oct. Trump's Foundation is likely to be accused of fraud - calling itself a charity to collect money while not having registered as a charity in the state.
4) Given that he's threatening to sue the NYT and blew his "America First" dogwhistle during today's Florida speech, the NYT beating the crap out of him seems likely.
5) The final debate is supposed to be on foreign policy. There has been talk of Clinton not turning up, which I think would be a mistake.
On 3. The Trump Foundation scandal didn't register in the polls, as I said the quantity of the allegations put out by the media is drowning the allegations themselves.
On 4. The NYT doesn't have much influence outside of the New York area, they are very well known but not many read them outside of a 50 mile radius from New York City, also they are priced in as a part of the Democratic Party. Partisan media have the least effect in affecting the voters in the middle.
On 5. Yes it would be a mistake by Hillary to run away from the debate.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
How on earth can you know that about Hammond when he has not given any formal statement yet. You may be right but you may also be very premature
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
How on earth can you know that about Hammond when he has not given any formal statement yet. You may be right but you may also be very premature
He was Foreign Sec for a while. He's not sprung from nowhere.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
If the OBR does anything to spoil the Brexit party we will almost certainly hear calls for its abolition. As with Mark Carney, an attitude of sub Brexit-adulation renders you unfit for office.
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.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
How on earth can you know that about Hammond when he has not given any formal statement yet. You may be right but you may also be very premature
Boring and steady is probably what we need right now. His problem isn't style but content - the questions posed by the confluence of Brexit, short-term market anxiety and the abandonment of the previous deficit-elimination plan are going to be very hard to answer. (Edit/ particularly as he probably won't be able to say anything more about our likely Brexit end position).
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
When a new Finance Director takes over the temptation is always to over state how bad things are (through write offs) to then show improvements in future reports. This does not happen when the old FD has been promoted to CEO. In this instance Hammond cannot easily blame the old FD as he has the Treasury to deal with. But he will have the temptation to strike a pessimistic tone due to Brexit. The Treasury people will push that as they want to justify their project fear forecasts. Therefore I am expecting an unnecessarily pessimistic report from Hammond this time. Of course it will, just as his conference speech did, further unsettle markets. I hope I am wrong - but does Mrs May and her advisors understand where this is heading and can she head off the problem? Hammond shows little independence of thought.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Yes, what Hammond gets up to with the books will be very telling. I suspect Austerity is a deap parrot; and there will be money for housing and health, but no real tax changes.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Yes, what Hammond gets up to with the books will be very telling. I suspect Austerity is a deap parrot; and there will be money for housing and health, but no real tax changes.
But he needs to talk about sunny uplands to avoid further market meltdowns.
Could damage Clinton's chances between now and election:
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
Could damage Trump's chances:
i) more sexual abuse allegations against Trump, or more evidence
ii) a tape from the Apprentice showing him using the "N-word"
iii) evidence of contacts with Russian intelligence
iv) the Trump Foundation charity case in the state of New York [3]
v) the New York Times sticks the boot in [4] (this overlaps with the above four points)
Probably a red herring:
* anything to do with Wikileaks
Something that hasn't played much of a role recently:
* Benghazi [5]
Notes
1) It's interesting that Trump is running an ad focused on Clinton's physical weakness. Is this desperation or do they have good intelligence? Footage of a near-collapse between now and the election similar to the footage on 11 September could hand Trump victory.
2) Trump made an error by holding the press conference before the second debate. That tipped off the organisers as to what he was up to, and they stopped the alleged victims entering his family box and then confronting Bill Clinton. Had the confrontation occurred, that would have been the big debate story.
3) Remember the charity case. Documents have been ordered to be submitted by 18 Oct. Trump's Foundation is likely to be accused of fraud - calling itself a charity to collect money while not having registered as a charity in the state.
4) Given that he's threatening to sue the NYT and blew his "America First" dogwhistle during today's Florida speech, the NYT beating the crap out of him seems likely.
5) The final debate is supposed to be on foreign policy. There has been talk of Clinton not turning up, which I think would be a mistake.
On 3. The Trump Foundation scandal didn't register in the polls, as I said the quantity of the allegations put out by the media is drowning the allegations themselves.
On 4. The NYT doesn't have much influence outside of the New York area, they are very well known but not many read them outside of a 50 mile radius from New York City, also they are priced in as a part of the Democratic Party. Partisan media have the least effect in affecting the voters in the middle.
On 5. Yes it would be a mistake by Hillary to run away from the debate.
NYT is surely like the Guardian. Limited scope of readership, but is picked up by the likes CNN who have nationwide audience.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
If the OBR does anything to spoil the Brexit party we will almost certainly hear calls for its abolition. As with Mark Carney, an attitude of sub Brexit-adulation renders you unfit for office.
Carney is unfit for office. That rate cut added to the pounds problems.
I suspect that the imminent economic numbers will prove to be considerably better than some imagine.
Inflation is likely to increase tax revenue sharply whilst reducing the real-terms generosity of pension handouts (it may even eliminate it at 2.5%) and increase the effect of welfare/PS pay freezes on deficit control.
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?
@AndyJS if you fancy this PM me, as I might otherwise miss it?
It seems to me that there is a massive move under way by those who reject leave, both in the UK and abroad, and in the courts to frustrate the will of the people in a democratic vote
The one re-assuring constant that we have in Theresa May is a leader who is not going to be pushed around by the elite and the remoaner's , but will stand strong and fight the battle for the 'little people' and ensure democracy is respected in this wonderful country of ours
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
How on earth can you know that about Hammond when he has not given any formal statement yet. You may be right but you may also be very premature
He was Foreign Sec for a while. He's not sprung from nowhere.
He followed the line of his civil servants. Ominous now at a remainer Treasury team.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
If the OBR does anything to spoil the Brexit party we will almost certainly hear calls for its abolition. As with Mark Carney, an attitude of sub Brexit-adulation renders you unfit for office.
Carney is unfit for office. That rate cut added to the pounds problems.
The falling pound is a wondrous outcome. Merv said so. Get with the program.
"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."
Donald Trump's problem shrugging off Candididaterape is that what he's accused of is more or less exactly what he was recorded boasting of. Why should we not take him at his own word?
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
If the OBR does anything to spoil the Brexit party we will almost certainly hear calls for its abolition. As with Mark Carney, an attitude of sub Brexit-adulation renders you unfit for office.
The OBR is there to provide independent projections, not to add more Kool-Aid to the punch bowl of your disturbing Brexit swinger's party.
Nice to see Russia Today detailing contents of Wikileaks dumps before Wikileaks dumps them.
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Yes, what Hammond gets up to with the books will be very telling. I suspect Austerity is a deap parrot; and there will be money for housing and health, but no real tax changes.
Austerity was never a live parrot. It has always been a charade on all sides.
Nice to see Russia Today detailing contents of Wikileaks dumps before Wikileaks dumps them.
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
I remember the days when the Guardian / BBC used to go into organismic rapture over Assange / wikileaks.
Nice to see Russia Today detailing contents of Wikileaks dumps before Wikileaks dumps them.
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
Or perhaps they gave the press a preview to boost publicity, as happens with many embargoed reports etc.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
"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."
Excellent piece. Cohen is establishing himself as the outstanding polemicist of the Brexit era. Of course, because he's also an outspoken critic of Corbyn and Islamism, it makes it harder for the Brexit hard-right to dismiss him as a Bolshevik agitator.
Why can't anyone just simply disagree with the fellow on this issue? Why should it be necessary to dismiss him as a "Bolshevik agitator"? On matters of politics I might not agree with, for example, our own FoxInSox but I would think long and hard before I rejected his medical advice.
This site is becoming, if it hasn't already become, quite a nasty place. People who hold different views are too often classified as headbangers, zealots, and other diverse insulting terms, and even by people who should know better. It didn't used to be like this on here, polite and amusing discussion used to be the norm when I first started reading the site.
Nice to see Russia Today detailing contents of Wikileaks dumps before Wikileaks dumps them.
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
I remember the days when the Guardian / BBC used to go into organismic rapture over Assange / wikileaks.
I lost faith when Snowdon tried to interfere in the NZ election. The *NZ* election. A five eyes member yes, but hardly a bastion of neo-liberal chomskyist fake democracy.
Nice to see Russia Today detailing contents of Wikileaks dumps before Wikileaks dumps them.
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
Or perhaps they gave the press a preview to boost publicity, as happens with many embargoed reports etc.
Wikileaks and Assange haven't changed - they were like this from the start. Check out what the Guardian found when they collaborated with Wikileaks over Snowden... exactly the same agenda.
Donald Trump's problem shrugging off Candididaterape is that what he's accused of is more or less exactly what he was recorded boasting of. Why should we not take him at his own word?
Has been a pitch perfect operation in the dark arts. How / why the GOP didn't do their research is really telling given he was the last man they wanted on the ticket.
Nice to see Russia Today detailing contents of Wikileaks dumps before Wikileaks dumps them.
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
I remember the days when the Guardian / BBC used to go into organismic rapture over Assange / wikileaks.
There was a time where Wikileaks carefully curated and redacted the info they got hold of.
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.
Chancellor's statement in November may provide some clues
Given the dire Balance of Trade figures I say it will hit bottom between parity with the Euro and parity with the Dollar.
I have pretty low expectations of the Autumn statement. Hammond has a nigh impossible task -
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control 2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
If the OBR does anything to spoil the Brexit party we will almost certainly hear calls for its abolition. As with Mark Carney, an attitude of sub Brexit-adulation renders you unfit for office.
Carney is unfit for office. That rate cut added to the pounds problems.
The falling pound is a wondrous outcome. Merv said so. Get with the program.
Merv apparently wants inflation too - with the higher interest rates that will involve. Having a negligible mortgage that doesn't bother me, but I suspect it does for plenty of people, most of whom voted for big B. Mr TC, your victory will turn to ashes.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
I barely listen to the US election now as it is looking like a walk over for Clinton. However just when the World needs real leadership I cannot see Clinton being anything but a disaster.
The only think that would rekindle my interest would be the overthrow of Trump and some other late candidate taking his place
2016 has been a good year political betting wise in landing ante-post bets 2 or more years out.I posted on this site ad infinitum for years Teresa May at 11-2.8-1 and 4-1 in the ante-post markets. My only outstanding bet is Democrats to win at 4-5 with a small saver on Bernie at 10-1.Again,I posted this advice.It's the equivalence of 40% pa interest on a 2 year fix.
Angela Eagle,George Osborne,Boris Johnson all proved splendid back to lays-hard to believe Osborne was 6-4 at one time.
From good advice on this site good money has been on Sadiq Khan at long-odds,again ante-post.I got 8-1.
Another advice here was the back-to-lay of Neil Findlay in the SLAB elections.Jim Murphy was a gift at Evens.
Anyone with a lump-sum to invest should consider a political betting bank of 2.5% of capital and each bet 2.5% of it-safe,responsible investment.If you cannot pick a winner after 40 bets then give up.
Always nice to take a few bob off the evil bookies.
The government will have been very satisfied today with the grilling that Lord Pannick QC received in court. Many judges put barristers through their paces but there were quite a few hints that the judges were unpersuaded by central aspects of his argument.
It seems to me that there is a massive move under way by those who reject leave, both in the UK and abroad, and in the courts to frustrate the will of the people in a democratic vote
The one re-assuring constant that we have in Theresa May is a leader who is not going to be pushed around by the elite and the remoaner's , but will stand strong and fight the battle for the 'little people' and ensure democracy is respected in this wonderful country of ours
I think it's left some of them a bit unhinged, to be sure. They can't work out that sometimes, a vote goes against you.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
If Hillary wins Virginia by only 2, she is going to lose Wisconsin and maybe Colorado, possibly Pennsylvania.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
The government will have been very satisfied today with the grilling that Lord Pannick QC received in court. Many judges put barristers through their paces but there were quite a few hints that the judges were unpersuaded by central aspects of his argument.
The next sitting is Monday, right? Do you happen to know what the timeframe is for decision? I know that the inevitable appeal will be done just in time for Christmas.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
If Hillary wins Virginia by only 2, she is going to lose Wisconsin and maybe Colorado, possibly Pennsylvania.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
I think a lead of 5% for Clinton in Virginia is par.
"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."
Excellent piece. Cohen is establishing himself as the outstanding polemicist of the Brexit era. Of course, because he's also an outspoken critic of Corbyn and Islamism, it makes it harder for the Brexit hard-right to dismiss him as a Bolshevik agitator.
Why can't anyone just simply disagree with the fellow on this issue? Why should it be necessary to dismiss him as a "Bolshevik agitator"? On matters of politics I might not agree with, for example, our own FoxInSox but I would think long and hard before I rejected his medical advice.
This site is becoming, if it hasn't already become, quite a nasty place. People who hold different views are too often classified as headbangers, zealots, and other diverse insulting terms, and even by people who should know better. It didn't used to be like this on here, polite and amusing discussion used to be the norm when I first started reading the site.
The tone on here now reminds me of the final month before the vote.
I think that's because people are now finally realising this is very real, and think HMG is vulnerable due to Sterling's fall.
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?
@AndyJS if you fancy this PM me, as I might otherwise miss it?
Thanks but not at the moment because I think it's quite likely they might get 48 or 49%.
He followed the line of his civil servants. Ominous now at a remainer Treasury team.
There is going to be a head on collision between May and Hammond.
That Hammond is bragging that he is unsackable is the first sign of such arrogance that will lead to the collision.
How quickly we've forgotten the truly unsackable one - Andrea Leadsom. She could wield the knife at any moment if Theresa May's handling of Brexit breaks down.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
If Hillary wins Virginia by only 2, she is going to lose Wisconsin and maybe Colorado, possibly Pennsylvania.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
I think a lead of 5% for Clinton in Virginia is par.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
If Hillary wins Virginia by only 2, she is going to lose Wisconsin and maybe Colorado, possibly Pennsylvania.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
Can you link to which poll averages you are using?
With recent polling showing Clinton ahead by 8.3% in VA (538 polls only forecast, although the others keep a similar margin between states) and Colorado being 6.7% ahead, all those below that - Florida, Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina abd Nevada can afford to be lost. That 1.5% margin is all that is needed to keep Colorado just on the Clinton side.
To lose Wisconsin (in which case it would be over anyway), then Virginia would be likely to be Clinton's by only 0.3%.
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:
He followed the line of his civil servants. Ominous now at a remainer Treasury team.
Quite so, Mr. Betting. I rather suspect that Hammond is a talking suit, a ventriloquist's dummy that is controlled by his own civil servants. Unfortunately those civil servants at the Treasury have had nearly twenty years of being allowed to run wild and ignore their actual jobs. Hammond may be the best TM had available but the UK really needs someone with some backbone, but who is not a megalomaniac trying to run the whole of government, to get a grip of HMT and get it to concentrate on its job.
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
If Hillary wins Virginia by only 2, she is going to lose Wisconsin and maybe Colorado, possibly Pennsylvania.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
I agree.
For Trump to be that close in VA, and I have my doubts that he is, he'd be having to be doing gangbusters with the military communities down in Tidewater. Is there any evidence that the military like him? I am not sure they do.
Until something else comes along to confirm, I'd be highly skeptical of this result.
He followed the line of his civil servants. Ominous now at a remainer Treasury team.
Quite so, Mr. Betting. I rather suspect that Hammond is a talking suit, a ventriloquist's dummy that is controlled by his own civil servants. Unfortunately those civil servants at the Treasury have had nearly twenty years of being allowed to run wild and ignore their actual jobs. Hammond may be the best TM had available but the UK really needs someone with some backbone, but who is not a megalomaniac trying to run the whole of government, to get a grip of HMT and get it to concentrate on its job.
Unfortunately another legacy of Brown's long tenure at no. 11 is that the Treasury became an instrument for controlling pretty much everything the government did, or tried to do. After so long this became its culture. All the ministers I have spoken with (mostly LibDems during the coalition) have tales to tell about the internal politics and controlling ways of treasury officials.
If you consider Brown's legacy, his poor record as PM and his knifing or banishment of anyone in Labour with talent who might be a rival, his record in the round must be amongst the worst of any leading politician.
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
Brexit represents a danger to international relations?
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
I agree with your second point, but of course take issue with the basis of the first.
Having spent 10 years as a British diplomat primarily in the international security area, and 4 years with the UN (reporting to and attending Security Council meetings regularly), I think I can distinguish between the threats to international peace from a voluntary divorce of peace-loving nations vs an easily manipulated hothead egotistical maniac with his finger on the button. There is no equivalence as you imply. Indeed, there is no reason per se that the UK's departure from the EU should adversely impact security at all. It could, but it need not.
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
Brexit represents a danger to international relations?
How else would you describe a rupture in the political structure of Europe?
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
Brexit represents a danger to international relations?
How else would you describe a rupture in the political structure of Europe?
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
Brexit represents a danger to international relations?
How else would you describe a rupture in the political structure of Europe?
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
Whilst the analogies people use are interesting and can be amusing as a perspective on events, I don't think they hold any value at all as analytical tools to try and make sense of what is an immensely complicated (and unprecedented) situation!
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
If a marriage in difficulty can be saved, why not try and save it? You certainly don't reach immediately for divorce after a one night of summer madness.
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:
GW's first term makes him look like a peacenik in comparison to Clinton 2.0
Remind me how Trump plans to resolve the Middle East conflicts.
It was not in defence of Trump, just a pedantic fact check.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
The irony of a Brexit advocate taking such a stance is not lost...
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
Brexit represents a danger to international relations?
How else would you describe a rupture in the political structure of Europe?
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
The analogy with personal relations is pushing it, but even so, to call it a voluntary divorce misses the mark. This is a change that was forced on the government because of a misjudgement by the Prime Minister, and its consequence could yet be the break up of the UK itself. We are in a phony peace period at the moment, but all the irreconcilable issues are still irreconcilable, and look even less so with each policy position that Theresa May is forced to take.
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
If a marriage in difficulty can be saved, why not try and save it? You certainly don't reach immediately for divorce after a one night of summer madness.
There was a renegotiation, but understandable that you might have forgotten about it.
Only three behind in VA when the Trump campaign pulled out? LOL.
It would be a surprise if VA was ever that close.
If it is that close on election night Trump would win the election.
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
Your maths is way out, on the polling average Clinton winning VA by five would see her romp home with 307 EV. Take that down to a three point win and that firewall still holds with 272. She would need to win VA by only 1.5% to flip the vote (and the state to do that would be Colorado on current polling averages).
Wrong.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
Actual polls in actual states, factored in already.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
If Hillary wins Virginia by only 2, she is going to lose Wisconsin and maybe Colorado, possibly Pennsylvania.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
I think a lead of 5% for Clinton in Virginia is par.
I agree.
Broadly, I'd say par for Clinton means +5% in Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, +3% in Pennsylvania, Colorado, 0% in Florida, -2% in Ohio, Nevada, Maine 2, -4% in Iowa.
Also, I see the Sun didn't miss man of the people drinking habits...hipster beers all round. IMO, that particular beer, very overrated. Of the US hipster beers, Sierra Nevada far better.
It seems to me that there is a massive move under way by those who reject leave, both in the UK and abroad, and in the courts to frustrate the will of the people in a democratic vote
The one re-assuring constant that we have in Theresa May is a leader who is not going to be pushed around by the elite and the remoaner's , but will stand strong and fight the battle for the 'little people' and ensure democracy is respected in this wonderful country of ours
It certainly seems that way. It's very depressing.
I do have a lot of confidence in Theresa May but I'm not sure even she can withstand the forces of Remainum that are being unleashed.
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
If a marriage in difficulty can be saved, why not try and save it? You certainly don't reach immediately for divorce after a one night of summer madness.
There was a renegotiation, but understandable that you might have forgotten about it.
The renegotiation was along the lines of, "Darling, you know I'm happy with our marriage, but we need to do something to placate your mother-in-law or I'll never get any peace."
He followed the line of his civil servants. Ominous now at a remainer Treasury team.
Quite so, Mr. Betting. I rather suspect that Hammond is a talking suit, a ventriloquist's dummy that is controlled by his own civil servants. Unfortunately those civil servants at the Treasury have had nearly twenty years of being allowed to run wild and ignore their actual jobs. Hammond may be the best TM had available but the UK really needs someone with some backbone, but who is not a megalomaniac trying to run the whole of government, to get a grip of HMT and get it to concentrate on its job.
Unfortunately another legacy of Brown's long tenure at no. 11 is that the Treasury became an instrument for controlling pretty much everything the government did, or tried to do. After so long this became its culture. All the ministers I have spoken with (mostly LibDems during the coalition) have tales to tell about the internal politics and controlling ways of treasury officials.
If you consider Brown's legacy, his poor record as PM and his knifing or banishment of anyone in Labour with talent who might be a rival, his record in the round must be amongst the worst of any leading politician.
Quite so, Mr. B2, but I am not so blind as to forgive Osborne his tenure either. The point that I would like to make is that HMT's civil servants have become rather too grand and seek to control too much and that having a weak player as Hammond in charge of them is not good for the UK.
House-trained ministers are great for the civil service but rarely good for the Country.
It seems to me that there is a massive move under way by those who reject leave, both in the UK and abroad, and in the courts to frustrate the will of the people in a democratic vote
The one re-assuring constant that we have in Theresa May is a leader who is not going to be pushed around by the elite and the remoaner's , but will stand strong and fight the battle for the 'little people' and ensure democracy is respected in this wonderful country of ours
I would not be too sure about the latter. May has postured and essentially dithered on Brexit. She has bent to the will of the tory party by setting a date to trigger article 50, and now made multiple concessions to parliament on debating the negotiating position. She gets the issues, but in making decisions she is a Merkel style ditherer. And she is in a very weak position.
No single person has the ability to lead us through this mess, it is a totally impossible situation. The logical response to Brexit was - in my view - a period of reflection on the different options we could try and pursue as a country before taking any formal action. If I recall correctly, this was the position actually advocated by the last Sunday times editorial before the referendum. In the coming weeks, as the complexities play themselves out, these ideas will resurface again.
This is not dithering or sabotage, it is coming to terms with the gravity of a decision, and is entirely necessary given the unfortunate mess made by Cameron in failing to make any preperations for a leave vote, which has always been more than possible.
I believe it is very likely that the government will fall and there will be a further general election, and it will be some time before we formally trigger article 50.
Could damage Clinton's chances between now and election:
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
Could damage Trump's chances:
i) more sexual abuse allegations against Trump, or more evidence
ii) a tape from the Apprentice showing him using the "N-word"
iii) evidence of contacts with Russian intelligence
iv) the Trump Foundation charity case in the state of New York [3]
v) the New York Times sticks the boot in [4] (this overlaps with the above four points)
Probably a red herring:
* anything to do with Wikileaks
Something that hasn't played much of a role recently:
* Benghazi [5]
Notes
1) It's interesting that Trump is running an ad focused on Clinton's physical weakness. Is this desperation or do they have good intelligence? Footage of a near-collapse between now and the election similar to the footage on 11 September could hand Trump victory.
2) Trump made an error by holding the press conference before the second debate. That tipped off the organisers as to what he was up to, and they stopped the alleged victims entering his family box and then confronting Bill Clinton. Had the confrontation occurred, that would have been the big debate story.
3) Remember the charity case. Documents have been ordered to be submitted by 18 Oct. Trump's Foundation is likely to be accused of fraud - calling itself a charity to collect money while not having registered as a charity in the state.
4) Given that he's threatening to sue the NYT and blew his "America First" dogwhistle during today's Florida speech, the NYT beating the crap out of him seems likely.
5) The final debate is supposed to be on foreign policy. There has been talk of Clinton not turning up, which I think would be a mistake.
On 3. The Trump Foundation scandal didn't register in the polls, as I said the quantity of the allegations put out by the media is drowning the allegations themselves.
On 4. The NYT doesn't have much influence outside of the New York area, they are very well known but not many read them outside of a 50 mile radius from New York City, also they are priced in as a part of the Democratic Party. Partisan media have the least effect in affecting the voters in the middle.
On 5. Yes it would be a mistake by Hillary to run away from the debate.
on 5, the only talk of someone skipping the debate is Trump. Clinton will 100% do it.
So you think divorce is a rupture of the fabric of society too? You advocate that spouses stay in bad marriages?
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
If a marriage in difficulty can be saved, why not try and save it? You certainly don't reach immediately for divorce after a one night of summer madness.
Comments
Thankfully Virginia is the first to close on election night.
Anything less than a 6 point Hillary lead in Virginia would point to a Trump victory.
a) State Department release of Clinton schedules
b) illness [1]
c) sexual abuse allegations against Bill Clinton - more evidence, more allegations, or further stunts by the Trump side in relation to the allegations [2]
Could damage Trump's chances:
i) more sexual abuse allegations against Trump, or more evidence
ii) a tape from the Apprentice showing him using the "N-word"
iii) evidence of contacts with Russian intelligence
iv) the Trump Foundation charity case in the state of New York [3]
v) the New York Times sticks the boot in [4] (this overlaps with the above four points)
Probably a red herring:
* anything to do with Wikileaks
Something that hasn't played much of a role recently:
* Benghazi [5]
Notes
1) It's interesting that Trump is running an ad focused on Clinton's physical weakness. Is this desperation or do they have good intelligence? Footage of a near-collapse between now and the election similar to the footage on 11 September could hand Trump victory.
2) Trump made an error by holding the press conference before the second debate. That tipped off the organisers as to what he was up to, and they stopped the alleged victims entering his family box and then confronting Bill Clinton. Had the confrontation occurred, that would have been the big debate story.
3) Remember the charity case. Documents have been ordered to be submitted by 18 Oct. Trump's Foundation is likely to be accused of fraud - calling itself a charity to collect money while not having registered as a charity in the state.
4) Given that he's threatening to sue the NYT and blew his "America First" dogwhistle during today's Florida speech, the NYT beating the crap out of him seems likely.
5) The final debate is supposed to be on foreign policy. There has been talk of Clinton not turning up, which I think would be a mistake.
North Carolina only has 9% Hispanic: http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/37 So it helps that requests are up 33%
d) a terrorist attack
https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats
1.provide reassurance in a situation beyond his control
2. set out a coherent new framework post that makes sense post austerity.
Brexit will make the books look worse; OBR will need to factor in lower future growth rates.
We need a Kenneth Clarke. Hammond seems to me more an Alistair Darling: unimaginative.
Edit: unimaginative is usually pretty good in a Chancellor but we're at a fiscal and monetary crossroads.
e) a flare-up between US and Russian forces in or near Syria
It could be argued that that would benefit Clinton, because of the perceived Trump-Putin link, but I think Trump's positioning as an aggressive nationalist with a lot of support among service personnel would make it advantageous for him, not for his opponent. That is assuming he handled it well.
On 4. The NYT doesn't have much influence outside of the New York area, they are very well known but not many read them outside of a 50 mile radius from New York City, also they are priced in as a part of the Democratic Party.
Partisan media have the least effect in affecting the voters in the middle.
On 5. Yes it would be a mistake by Hillary to run away from the debate.
If there is no recession in america, Britain might hit 3% growth or more next year thanks to the cheap pound.
3% growth with 2% inflation will do wonders in lowering the debt as a share of GDP provided a deficit that is lower than 5% of GDP.
Inflation is likely to increase tax revenue sharply whilst reducing the real-terms generosity of pension handouts (it may even eliminate it at 2.5%) and increase the effect of welfare/PS pay freezes on deficit control.
The one re-assuring constant that we have in Theresa May is a leader who is not going to be pushed around by the elite and the remoaner's , but will stand strong and fight the battle for the 'little people' and ensure democracy is respected in this wonderful country of ours
Anyone still have doubts?
Wikileaks was once a great standard bearer for freedom, exposing corrupt western governments and the terrible things they do to their citizens, according to left wing liberals.
Those left wing liberals should be eating s**t now. They didn't listen and refused to see because they had their head up their arses.
You discount the effect of Tim Kaine as Hillary's VP adding a couple of points for Hillary there.
If Hillary wins Virginia by 5 it will mean the national vote is a tie.
Hillary does have that 272 firewall due to her strength in Pennsylvania, but there are weaknesses in that firewall if it's a tie nationally, namely in Colorado, Wisconsin and Michigan.
This site is becoming, if it hasn't already become, quite a nasty place. People who hold different views are too often classified as headbangers, zealots, and other diverse insulting terms, and even by people who should know better. It didn't used to be like this on here, polite and amusing discussion used to be the norm when I first started reading the site.
That time is long, long past.
Win VA by two and she is likely to be home, I wouldn't want to mislead those who might potentially lose big time, with Virginia declaring early on in the evening.
That Hammond is bragging that he is unsackable is the first sign of such arrogance that will lead to the collision.
The only think that would rekindle my interest would be the overthrow of Trump and some other late candidate taking his place
My only outstanding bet is Democrats to win at 4-5 with a small saver on Bernie at 10-1.Again,I posted this advice.It's the equivalence of 40% pa interest on a 2 year fix.
Angela Eagle,George Osborne,Boris Johnson all proved splendid back to lays-hard to believe Osborne was 6-4 at one time.
From good advice on this site good money has been on Sadiq Khan at long-odds,again ante-post.I got 8-1.
Another advice here was the back-to-lay of Neil Findlay in the SLAB elections.Jim Murphy was a gift at Evens.
Anyone with a lump-sum to invest should consider a political betting bank of 2.5% of capital and each bet 2.5% of it-safe,responsible investment.If you cannot pick a winner after 40 bets then give up.
Always nice to take a few bob off the evil bookies.
If it wasn't my country, that would be fascinating to see.
As someone pointed out, May is making all the decisions here. Not parliament. Not even cabinet. May. An unelected Prime Minister.
She is walking the highest and sway-iest of tightropes. Full credit if she pulls it off.
And of course Florida, Nevada, N.Carolina.
If Hillary struggles to win Virginia with the ever larger D.C suburbs+Tim Kaine she would definitely lose, Trump is absolutely hated in the D.C suburbs.
May's issued more slap downs than Zsa Zsa Gabor.
I think that's because people are now finally realising this is very real, and think HMG is vulnerable due to Sterling's fall.
With recent polling showing Clinton ahead by 8.3% in VA (538 polls only forecast, although the others keep a similar margin between states) and Colorado being 6.7% ahead, all those below that - Florida, Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina abd Nevada can afford to be lost. That 1.5% margin is all that is needed to keep Colorado just on the Clinton side.
To lose Wisconsin (in which case it would be over anyway), then Virginia would be likely to be Clinton's by only 0.3%.
For the record, I am anyone but Trump precisely because of the danger he represents to international relations.
Incidentally, if Trump does win, it will surely prove that the electoral forces which helped Leave to win were not primarily connected with the European Union.
For Trump to be that close in VA, and I have my doubts that he is, he'd be having to be doing gangbusters with the military communities down in Tidewater. Is there any evidence that the military like him? I am not sure they do.
Until something else comes along to confirm, I'd be highly skeptical of this result.
If you consider Brown's legacy, his poor record as PM and his knifing or banishment of anyone in Labour with talent who might be a rival, his record in the round must be amongst the worst of any leading politician.
Having spent 10 years as a British diplomat primarily in the international security area, and 4 years with the UN (reporting to and attending Security Council meetings regularly), I think I can distinguish between the threats to international peace from a voluntary divorce of peace-loving nations vs an easily manipulated hothead egotistical maniac with his finger on the button. There is no equivalence as you imply. Indeed, there is no reason per se that the UK's departure from the EU should adversely impact security at all. It could, but it need not.
Personally, I think that is a recipe for increased domestic violence and societal damage, particularly to the kids.
Worth noting that the Emerson +3 has a MoE of 3.9%, and polls before the debate/tapes had Clinton at an average +8.
https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/786679113822113792
Also, I see the Sun didn't miss man of the people drinking habits...hipster beers all round. IMO, that particular beer, very overrated. Of the US hipster beers, Sierra Nevada far better.
I do have a lot of confidence in Theresa May but I'm not sure even she can withstand the forces of Remainum that are being unleashed.
House-trained ministers are great for the civil service but rarely good for the Country.
Residents gain Tandridge Limpsfield from Conservatives
https://twitter.com/foxnewspoll/status/786688187611639809
No single person has the ability to lead us through this mess, it is a totally impossible situation. The logical response to Brexit was - in my view - a period of reflection on the different options we could try and pursue as a country before taking any formal action. If I recall correctly, this was the position actually advocated by the last Sunday times editorial before the referendum. In the coming weeks, as the complexities play themselves out, these ideas will resurface again.
This is not dithering or sabotage, it is coming to terms with the gravity of a decision, and is entirely necessary given the unfortunate mess made by Cameron in failing to make any preperations for a leave vote, which has always been more than possible.
I believe it is very likely that the government will fall and there will be a further general election, and it will be some time before we formally trigger article 50.
Res 713
Con 472
LDem 33
Lab 25
Wanna know how out of touch Labour is? See @EmilyThornberry on #bbcqt getting booed for defaming the demos as stupid and uninformed #brexit