That's a slightly strange interpretation. Big rise in all absentee ballots for all registered affiliations, the proportions look pretty much the same to me.
The dems and repubs are keeping up with each other which would make it a wash but the independents have surged from about 50k to 200k. So question is who are the NEW independents voting for?
"who are these newbie NPAs who didn’t vote in 2012?
Nearly 18% are Hispanic, but that’s below the 22% of all NPAs in the voter file who are Hispanic (as of September 1, 2016). Over 68% of the NPAs who’ve voted a VBM ballot but who didn’t vote in 2012 are white, well above the 59% of all NPAs in the voter file who are white." These are the new IPA voters only however.
Interesting. Is there a big WWC population in Florida? It could be women as well...
Florida is less white but the white population there is more non uni educated.
It's difficult to discern much from the early returns. I assume nothing is counted till polls close on election day ?
We do know whether the voter is a registered Democrat/Republican/Independent and quite a lot of demographics. These do not point to shy Trumpers, and registration is closed in nearly all states.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
And in 2012 Rasmussen had Romney beating Obama by 1%.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Rotherham?
Not real Muslims. Same as the terrorists in Paris, Brussels and Nice, I guess.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Rotherham?
Not real Muslims. Same as the terrorists in Paris, Brussels and Nice, I guess.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
German media saying that the regional government of Brussels has declined ratification of CETA.
Brussels rejects the EU.
Stunning if correct and that's if? It does sum up the EU in one short sentence. Another would be in normal business terms
"Not fit for purpose" or for short SNAFU
What is the nature of your criticism? That the EU is too democratic or that it is not centralised enough? Or simply that it is not capable enough of imposing policies that you agree with?
Isn't that because the Walloons veto'd it earlier in the week?
That's not a rejection by the national Parliament but a rejection by the regional partliament of Brussels. It means 2/5 Belgian regional governments have rejected it.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
German media saying that the regional government of Brussels has declined ratification of CETA.
Brussels rejects the EU.
Stunning if correct and that's if? It does sum up the EU in one short sentence. Another would be in normal business terms
"Not fit for purpose" or for short SNAFU
What is the nature of your criticism? That the EU is too democratic or that it is not centralised enough? Or simply that it is not capable enough of imposing policies that you agree with?
That's a slightly strange interpretation. Big rise in all absentee ballots for all registered affiliations, the proportions look pretty much the same to me.
The dems and repubs are keeping up with each other which would make it a wash but the independents have surged from about 50k to 200k. So question is who are the NEW independents voting for?
"who are these newbie NPAs who didn’t vote in 2012?
Nearly 18% are Hispanic, but that’s below the 22% of all NPAs in the voter file who are Hispanic (as of September 1, 2016). Over 68% of the NPAs who’ve voted a VBM ballot but who didn’t vote in 2012 are white, well above the 59% of all NPAs in the voter file who are white." These are the new IPA voters only however.
Interesting. Is there a big WWC population in Florida? It could be women as well...
Florida is less white but the white population there is more non uni educated.
It's difficult to discern much from the early returns. I assume nothing is counted till polls close on election day ?
We do know whether the voter is a registered Democrat/Republican/Independent and quite a lot of demographics. These do not point to shy Trumpers, and registration is closed in nearly all states.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
And in 2012 Rasmussen had Romney beating Obama by 1%.
How is that Romney presidency going?
As I said in 2004 they were spot on, it was the higher minority turnout in 2012 which was the problem for them
Isn't that because the Walloons veto'd it earlier in the week?
That's not a rejection by the national Parliament but a rejection by the regional partliament of Brussels. It means 2/5 Belgian regional governments have rejected it.
But they knew it was already dead? That might affect their decision.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
It was out by 5 percentage points, that's not higher than average minority turnout, that's like 50% higher turnout.
Isn't that because the Walloons veto'd it earlier in the week?
That's not a rejection by the national Parliament but a rejection by the regional partliament of Brussels. It means 2/5 Belgian regional governments have rejected it.
But they knew it was already dead? That might affect their decision.
It's possible but then again surely the Belgian capital region would want to affirm it's support for the EU and show that they aren't the same as those nasty Little Walloons.
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
@ScottyNational: Line : After Theresa May installs a direct line to Sturgeon re Brexit, a fault is reported as May can only hear a continuous whining noise
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
It was out by 5 percentage points, that's not higher than average minority turnout, that's like 50% higher turnout.
The main factor was above average minority turnout and that was the case with other pollsters too who underestimated Obama, this year that is not an issue as Hillary has far less enthusiasm amongst African Americans particularly than Obama did while white working class voters are more enthusiastic about Trump than Romney which could make up the remainder of the difference
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
I see Ladbrokes cut their odds from 5/6 to 4/6 We're ramping this
I guess Le Pen v Juppé could get interesting as the former knows she will have to do something different.
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
So the case for the defence is that 12 years ago they got one correct. Whoopeee !!
Tell me what's your best guess when Rasmussen will start trending to the average Clinton poll lead? Perhaps it'll be the same time that AA voters suddenly desert Trump from over 20% of their sample to around 5% and in conjunction when Rasmussen also reflect that GOP voters are substantially less enthusiastic for Trump than Democrats are for Clinton.
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
And it was only sent for popular ratification to national Parliaments and assemblies because of pressure caused by Brexit. Juncker wanted to push it through without that and impose it via a series of directives.
That's a slightly strange interpretation. Big rise in all absentee ballots for all registered affiliations, the proportions look pretty much the same to me.
The dems and repubs are keeping up with each other which would make it a wash but the independents have surged from about 50k to 200k. So question is who are the NEW independents voting for?
"who are these newbie NPAs who didn’t vote in 2012?
Nearly 18% are Hispanic, but that’s below the 22% of all NPAs in the voter file who are Hispanic (as of September 1, 2016). Over 68% of the NPAs who’ve voted a VBM ballot but who didn’t vote in 2012 are white, well above the 59% of all NPAs in the voter file who are white." These are the new IPA voters only however.
Interesting. Is there a big WWC population in Florida? It could be women as well...
Florida is less white but the white population there is more non uni educated.
It's difficult to discern much from the early returns. I assume nothing is counted till polls close on election day ?
We do know whether the voter is a registered Democrat/Republican/Independent and quite a lot of demographics. These do not point to shy Trumpers, and registration is closed in nearly all states.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
And in 2012 Rasmussen had Romney beating Obama by 1%.
How is that Romney presidency going?
As I said in 2004 they were spot on, it was the higher minority turnout in 2012 which was the problem for them
As I pointed out last night, in 2004 the Rasmussen lead you quoted was very close to the RCP average.
If two people were both right about something before, and they disagree now, it's daft to say one of them must be right now because he was right before!
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
And it was only sent for popular ratification to national Parliaments and assemblies because of pressure caused by Brexit. Juncker wanted to push it through without that and impose it via a series of directives.
Really? I'd be interested to read more on that plan...
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
Subsidiarity in action!
I would beg to differ... the buck should have stopped at national governments.
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
Subsidiarity in action!
I would beg to differ... the buck should have stopped at national governments.
That's an issue for Belgium, not for the EU. If any entity is not fit for purpose in this picture, it's Belgium.
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
So the case for the defence is that 12 years ago they got one correct. Whoopeee !!
Tell me what's your best guess when Rasmussen will start trending to the average Clinton poll lead? Perhaps it'll be the same time that AA voters suddenly desert Trump from over 20% of their sample to around 5% and in conjunction when Rasmussen also reflect that GOP voters are substantially less enthusiastic for Trump than Democrats are for Clinton.
It's a tricky one ....
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
@HYUFD - As one of PB's most reliable and staunch Trumpsters perhaps you might take up my challenge and give some .... well any .... viable path to 270 EC votes for Donald ?
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
Subsidiarity in action!
I would beg to differ... the buck should have stopped at national governments.
That's an issue for Belgium, not for the EU. If any entity is not fit for purpose in this picture, it's Belgium.
Oh, I agree first and foremost the Belgians are to blame here. The EU gets second place for not selling the deal properly.
It certainly is interesting that it is Belgium, home of the EU, that this has happened. When I was there there did seem to be some tension - not by the majority but a sizeable minority - who felt that there was a growing divide between Brussel's new technocrats and the ordinary people.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
This was a regional parliament in Belgium's power sharing deal.
Subsidiarity in action!
I would beg to differ... the buck should have stopped at national governments.
That's an issue for Belgium, not for the EU. If any entity is not fit for purpose in this picture, it's Belgium.
Oh, I agree first and foremost the Belgians are to blame here. The EU gets second place for not selling the deal properly.
It doesn't really matter who is to blame. The issue is that a trade deal that was favourable to the UK has been lost because the EU is incapable of reaching any kind of consensus. Our leave vote is becoming more valuable and being vindicated on an almost daily basis right now.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou is a strong supporter of Juppé and will not challenge him.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
So the case for the defence is that 12 years ago they got one correct. Whoopeee !!
Tell me what's your best guess when Rasmussen will start trending to the average Clinton poll lead? Perhaps it'll be the same time that AA voters suddenly desert Trump from over 20% of their sample to around 5% and in conjunction when Rasmussen also reflect that GOP voters are substantially less enthusiastic for Trump than Democrats are for Clinton.
It's a tricky one ....
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
The latter are certainly more prominent in other polls. And the scrabble by the GOP to disassociate themselves from Trump shows that it is something they are definitely worried about.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
It got it wrong in 2008 as well. Why didn't they learn?
What do they have as Hispanic support out of curiosity? Because that DEFINITELY won't be as high for Trump...
Does that mean someone can now walk into a Muslim bakers, and demand a cake with the image of Islam's Prophet on it?
Or walk into a muslim baker (rather than a christian baker) and ask for a cake celebrating a gay marriage.
Oh stop muslims are often found to not be following the law and are sanctioned. Doubt Plato would be so outraged if it was a Muslim told to follow the law more like she would be saying good.
Reading the BBC report, it's fairly clear that all a baker has to do is refuse to make a cake with ANY slogan (or religious figure) on it: The judges also said that Ashers would not have objected to a cake carrying the message: "Support Heterosexual Marriage" or indeed "Support Marriage"....
The point is not that they are being forced to provide a particular service; rather that they are not able in law to discriminate while providing that particular service. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think it would take very long to come up with some simple terms of service for those who fear getting caught out by this ruling.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
Brussels continues to demonstrate itself as bureaucratic, bogged down, and unable to face the problems of today.
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
Ok .... let's give you a fall in AA turnout and an uptick in WWC for Trump.
I'll raise you ....
1. A spike in Hispanic turnout in swing states. 2. A rise in women voting nationwide. 3. A fall in overall GOP voters for Trump. 4. A Clinton nationwide lead of 6 points plus 5. A significant Clinton lead in most swing state polling 6. Superor numbers for Clinton in most swing state early voting returns 7. A rise in Democrat registrations in most swing states 8. A huge disparity in favour of the Clinton ground game 9. Rasmussen has Clinton losing two weeks out
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
Ok .... let's give you a fall in AA turnout and an uptick in WWC for Trump.
I'll raise you ....
1. A spike in Hispanic turnout in swing states. 2. A rise in women voting nationwide. 3. A fall in overall GOP voters for Trump. 4. A Clinton nationwide lead of 6 points plus 5. A significant Clinton lead in most swing state polling 6. Superor numbers for Clinton in most swing state early voting returns 7. A rise in Democrat registrations in most swing states 8. A huge disparity in favour of the Clinton ground game 9. Rasmussen had Clinton losing two week out
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
So what? Remain locked in an increasingly dysfunctional EU that won't do deals with the other 90% of the world? Access to the single market isn't that valuable.
It's an unusual strategy if you want to get maximum supporter turnout. I think the "due to media bias it's neck and neck, help us win" would be more orthodox.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
I see Ladbrokes cut their odds from 5/6 to 4/6 We're ramping this
I guess Le Pen v Juppé could get interesting as the former knows she will have to do something different.
It's strange, Juppe is like the French Hillary Clinton, certainly from the "more of the same" perspective, and having been around for centuries in french politics. He was one of the most hated PMs when he presided over massive strikes back in 1995, and yet is apparently now very popular again in France. I struggle to see him being much of an improvement on Hollande. I think they will basically end up in the same position again in 2022.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
Better off out makes more sense by the day.
You're going to have similar problems doing trade deals with *anybody*. Free trade is currently unpopular, and there are people coming at it from both the right and the left. This is why Brexit was able to happen. But it also makes it hard or impossible for a non-destructive Brexit to happen.
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
Ok .... let's give you a fall in AA turnout and an uptick in WWC for Trump.
I'll raise you ....
1. A spike in Hispanic turnout in swing states. 2. A rise in women voting nationwide. 3. A fall in overall GOP voters for Trump. 4. A Clinton nationwide lead of 6 points plus 5. A significant Clinton lead in most swing state polling 6. Superor numbers for Clinton in most swing state early voting returns 7. A rise in Democrat registrations in most swing states 8. A huge disparity in favour of the Clinton ground game 9. Rasmussen had Clinton losing two week out
And finally, the ace in the hole for Clinton ....
10. Donald Trump
As I said even if Trump wins more blue collar Democrats than Hillary wins establishment Republicans party ID makes little difference and polling as I posted yesterday showed African Americans 18% less enthusiastic about the 2016 election than the 2012 election. As for the polling whether the majority showing Clinton ahead or the minority showing Trump ahead or tied are correct we will find out on election night
It's an unusual strategy if you want to get maximum supporter turnout. I think the "due to media bias it's neck and neck, help us win" would be more orthodox.
Trump and Corbyn has something in common here...
The theory that only works in primaries/party leadership contests, not so much in general elections
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou is a strong supporter of Juppé and will not challenge him.
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
So the case for the defence is that 12 years ago they got one correct. Whoopeee !!
Tell me what's your best guess when Rasmussen will start trending to the average Clinton poll lead? Perhaps it'll be the same time that AA voters suddenly desert Trump from over 20% of their sample to around 5% and in conjunction when Rasmussen also reflect that GOP voters are substantially less enthusiastic for Trump than Democrats are for Clinton.
It's a tricky one ....
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
The latter are certainly more prominent in other polls. And the scrabble by the GOP to disassociate themselves from Trump shows that it is something they are definitely worried about.
Also, the latter have a lot more women.
Establishment Republicans are more likely just to vote downballot than for Hillary, apart from a handful like Bush Snr, libertarians will vote for Johnson not Clinton
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou is a strong supporter of Juppé and will not challenge him.
Even if he does not Macron almost certainly will
I would say Macron hasn't decided whether to take on Juppé, he'd definitely take on Sarkozy.
The polling already shows the effect of Macron on the Juppé/Le Pen race, it's not enough to make Juppé vulnerable.
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
It got it wrong in 2008 as well. Why didn't they learn?
What do they have as Hispanic support out of curiosity? Because that DEFINITELY won't be as high for Trump...
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
Rasmussen has Trump winning 15% of Democrats, more than the 11% of Republicans Hillary is winning. If white, blue collar Democrats vote for Trump in a way they have not done for any Republican candidate since Reagan then party ID of voters is of little use
Your love affair with Rasmussen is rather quaint.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
It was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2004. It got 2012 wrong because of above average minority turnout. With Obama no longer on the ballot that is unlikely to be the case this year making turnout closer to 2004 and if white working class turnout is up on last time, especially with their greater enthusiasm for Trump than Romney, I would not dismiss Rasmussen yet
It got it wrong in 2008 as well. Why didn't they learn?
What do they have as Hispanic support out of curiosity? Because that DEFINITELY won't be as high for Trump...
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
Better off out makes more sense by the day.
You're going to have similar problems doing trade deals with *anybody*. Free trade is currently unpopular, and there are people coming at it from both the right and the left. This is why Brexit was able to happen. But it also makes it hard or impossible for a non-destructive Brexit to happen.
So, is the complaint that the EU erodes too much sovereignty or that too many veto-wielding entities make it sclerotic? Because to me, those points seem a bit contradictory.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."
And this is TFEU article 218, they really only mention the need to get permission from the EUparl to get the deal through. The Council of the EU will be given permission by the EUparl to negotiate present a deal by QMV which the EUparl will rubber stamp. As long as we don't stray into foreign affairs and social policy.
Should a Muslim baker be legally obliged to bake Cakes with " Ban new Mosque building " on them ? Is " 9/11 is a lie " a political belief ? If it is would a bereaved relative of a victim have to bake a cake with it on ? And so on and so on.
In Northern Ireland at least, the Muslim baker or bereaved relative would just have to suck it up.
Seems to be a very odd law. One imagines it would repealed if a Muslim baker was targeted.
Rubbish.
I'm sure you thought the police turning a blind eye to the gang rapes in Rotherham was also "rubbish" when The Times reported it all those years ago.
And what about Jimmy savvile et al is he Muslim too?
Different case and both have the same root cause of being a protected class. Muslims, celebrities and, until recently, the clergy got away with rape and sexual abuse because they are a protected class. Same as Trump, Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby in the US.
Muslims are not a protected class, I can tell u that for nothing.
And yet Muslim men got away with mass gang rapes of white girls in northern cities for years while the police turned a blind eye. There is even some evidence that it has continued despite the comprehensive and damning report by Professor Alexis Jay.
Maybe Muslim in name only.
Seriously?
Aren't there inherent risks in moving away from the Muslim faith?
Thanks. My German isn't up to it but I note from the map on that link that Brussels is actually drawn separate to Wallonia. Some sites are saying Brussels- Wallonia so I was thinking there was a more direct link.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
Belgians demonstrating where sovereignty lies - in national parliaments...
What is the UK government's position on this deal? Will the wishes of the UK government be implemented?
When was the last presidential election without Obama on the ballot boosting African American turnout? 12 years ago. Trump does not need to win African Americans every African-American who voted for Obama but not Hillary is a net gain for him. Blue collar Democrats are not enthusiastic about Hillary, establishment Republicans are not enthusiastic about Trump. Who are more numerous? Not the latter.
Ok .... let's give you a fall in AA turnout and an uptick in WWC for Trump.
I'll raise you ....
1. A spike in Hispanic turnout in swing states. 2. A rise in women voting nationwide. 3. A fall in overall GOP voters for Trump. 4. A Clinton nationwide lead of 6 points plus 5. A significant Clinton lead in most swing state polling 6. Superor numbers for Clinton in most swing state early voting returns 7. A rise in Democrat registrations in most swing states 8. A huge disparity in favour of the Clinton ground game 9. Rasmussen had Clinton losing two week out
First round: Juppé 39 % / Le Pen 29% Sarkozy 20% / Le Pen 25% (a decent poll at this stage for Sarkozy)
No second round polling; the status quo is a 55/45 victory for Sarkozy and a 65/35 victory for Juppé.
Some polls have shown Le Pen actually beating Juppe in the first round if Macron runs as a centrist candidate, which he probably will
Yes; Macron takes about 10% of Juppe's vote, leaving Juppe and Le Pen on about 28% apiece.
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
Bayrou will also likely eat into Juppe's vote. If Le Pen comes first in round 1 it would be an earthquake, beating even her father's second place in 2002. Yes Juppe would likely win round 2 but he is the epitome of the French establishment, even more so than Sarkozy, while Marine Le Pen would position herself as a charismatic outsider and it would likely be closer than Chirac Jean Marie Le Pen was. Juppe is competent but lacks Chirac's charisma
Bayrou is a strong supporter of Juppé and will not challenge him.
Even if he does not Macron almost certainly will
I would say Macron hasn't decided whether to take on Juppé, he'd definitely take on Sarkozy.
The polling already shows the effect of Macron on the Juppé/Le Pen race, it's not enough to make Juppé vulnerable.
It could be enough though for Marine Le Pen to come first in round 1 according to some pollsters
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
Better off out makes more sense by the day.
Yes, the organisation cannot function properly because of it's half-baked decision making structure, and the only ways to correct it is to further erode any semblance of national sovereignty or leave.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."
From the text of the Lisbon treaty.
Yes, but that is the exit agreement, terms for leaving (who pays salaries and pensions, how to divide up any assets, etc etc). It's not about the separate deal we'll need to on our post-Brexit relationship with the EU. These two often get conflated, and in practice they will be mixed up, but they are not the same thing:
You're going to have similar problems doing trade deals with *anybody*. Free trade is currently unpopular, and there are people coming at it from both the right and the left. This is why Brexit was able to happen. But it also makes it hard or impossible for a non-destructive Brexit to happen.
Certainly free trade is not as popular as it once was. But I think bilateral deals should be easier than the cat herding that is necessary to get the EU to agree to something.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."
From the text of the Lisbon treaty.
Yes, but that is the exit agreement, terms for leaving (who pays salaries and pensions, how to divide up any assets, etc etc). It's not about the separate deal we'll need to on our post-Brexit relationship with the EU. These two often get conflated, and in practice they will be mixed up, but they are not the same thing:
The specific text says "taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union". That means at least a Heads of Terms will have to be agreed under Article 50 via QMV, but probably the whole lot.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
Better off out makes more sense by the day.
You're going to have similar problems doing trade deals with *anybody*. Free trade is currently unpopular, and there are people coming at it from both the right and the left. This is why Brexit was able to happen. But it also makes it hard or impossible for a non-destructive Brexit to happen.
So, is the complaint that the EU erodes too much sovereignty or that too many veto-wielding entities make it sclerotic? Because to me, those points seem a bit contradictory.
If we want to do a trade deal with Canada (pre-BrExit) we cant because the EU has too much authority, and we can't get them to do it (as has been demonstrated) because its sclerotic.
Its the worse of both world in many ways, we cant make the deal, and they are unable to, so no deals get done.
So if a bunch of Belgian communists, and greens can veto a free trade deal between Canada and the EU, then you do have to wonder what sort of deals and with whom would be acceptable? I suspect the answer is essentially no deals with anybody.
But we're going to get a BRILLIANT deal.
Oh, wait...
By QMV you fool.
How do you know that? The Canada deal seemed to require unanimity. In our case, since migration is an issue, it is extremely far from obvious that we can structure a deal so that it sneaks in under QMV. As I've said before, I certainly hope that the UK negotiators are aware of the need to try to do so, but there's no guarantee either that they are aware, or that it can be done.
"A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament."
From the text of the Lisbon treaty.
Sure, so the question is how much you can include under "the arrangements for its withdrawal". For example, if the suggested arrangement was, "Britain will continue to pay its budget contributions, and in return Queen Elizabeth II will reign over all of Europe", you can imagine that other countries that already have monarchs might feel this should be in a separate treaty that they'd have veto power over.
Rasmussen actually had Obama ahead in its final 2008 poll
I think the clue is the final three words ....
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
Above average white working class turnout in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and one of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Florida and Nevada are also not yet out of his reach
Comments
How many successful prosecutions for FGM again?
Clinton 41 .. Trump 41
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/
"Not fit for purpose" or for short SNAFU
EDIT - I note it's Wallonia- Brussels so a separate region or not?
How is that Romney presidency going?
This is the source.
Let's show out love and support to Chad Evans.
Will it survive 8th November? .... I fear not ....
Anyway, I'm off for a bit.
That means some 1% of the EU population has trashed the CETA agreement for the other 99% a negotiation that has been ongoing for seven years ....7 years!!!!
At least it's 4% difference here for the referendum and everyone got to vote even if they couldn't be arsed. How many here got to vote on acceptance of CETA and prevented the "head bangers" and xenophobic anti-everything little Wallonians and bBrussels nut jobs " from rejecting it?
That would be ........none.
I suppose we have to let idiocy take its course though as mentioned earlier in the thread
That being said, it makes no difference to the ultimate outcome, as Le Pen basically picks up no transfers, and he wins 70:30.
The question is: can Sarkozy beat Juppe? It will be fascinating to watch, but if Juppe wins, he is near certain to be the next French President. Anything more than about 1.6 on him looks pretty good value to me*.
* I'm on at evens, at that may be skewing my view.
I guess Le Pen v Juppé could get interesting as the former knows she will have to do something different.
Tell me what's your best guess when Rasmussen will start trending to the average Clinton poll lead? Perhaps it'll be the same time that AA voters suddenly desert Trump from over 20% of their sample to around 5% and in conjunction when Rasmussen also reflect that GOP voters are substantially less enthusiastic for Trump than Democrats are for Clinton.
It's a tricky one ....
http://www.androidworld.com/prod35.htm
Rasmussen nailed 2004; they are like the Italian national side who have a good world cup every 12 years.
If two people were both right about something before, and they disagree now, it's daft to say one of them must be right now because he was right before!
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/790532437596106752
It certainly is interesting that it is Belgium, home of the EU, that this has happened. When I was there there did seem to be some tension - not by the majority but a sizeable minority - who felt that there was a growing divide between Brussel's new technocrats and the ordinary people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Northern_Ireland
I'm not sure whether any of them has ventured into the fiercely competitive market in Northern Ireland for baked goods.
I wonder how claims that he was building a survivalist compound were exaggerated - was it only a survivalist semi-detached house?
Better off out makes more sense by the day.
Also, the latter have a lot more women.
Oh, wait...
What do they have as Hispanic support out of curiosity? Because that DEFINITELY won't be as high for Trump...
The judges also said that Ashers would not have objected to a cake carrying the message: "Support Heterosexual Marriage" or indeed "Support Marriage"....
The point is not that they are being forced to provide a particular service; rather that they are not able in law to discriminate while providing that particular service.
I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think it would take very long to come up with some simple terms of service for those who fear getting caught out by this ruling.
I'll raise you ....
1. A spike in Hispanic turnout in swing states.
2. A rise in women voting nationwide.
3. A fall in overall GOP voters for Trump.
4. A Clinton nationwide lead of 6 points plus
5. A significant Clinton lead in most swing state polling
6. Superor numbers for Clinton in most swing state early voting returns
7. A rise in Democrat registrations in most swing states
8. A huge disparity in favour of the Clinton ground game
9. Rasmussen has Clinton losing two weeks out
And finally, the ace in the hole for Clinton ....
10. Donald Trump
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/790534428942622721
Trump and Corbyn has something in common here...
https://twitter.com/owillis/status/790531638958710784
The polling already shows the effect of Macron on the Juppé/Le Pen race, it's not enough to make Juppé vulnerable.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/03/02/the-idea-that-post-brexit-trade-negotiations-would-be-wrapped-up-quickly-is-divorced-from-reality/
Oh ... and whilst on the theme of a "clue" .... any clue yet of Trump's path to 270 ??
From the text of the Lisbon treaty.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:12008E218
And this is TFEU article 218, they really only mention the need to get permission from the EUparl to get the deal through. The Council of the EU will be given permission by the EUparl to negotiate present a deal by QMV which the EUparl will rubber stamp. As long as we don't stray into foreign affairs and social policy.
Their record looks fine to me?
Will the wishes of the UK government be implemented?
Canada deal was done in five years. Wonder why Alastair left this out of his table??
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Economic_and_Trade_Agreement
http://www.pumpcourtchambers.com/blog/gay-cake
The EU is the road to nowhere.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/02/article-50-trade-eu-deals-globalisation
Its the worse of both world in many ways, we cant make the deal, and they are unable to, so no deals get done.