politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Heathrow expansion to go ahead: Zac Goldsmith to make a statem

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Heathrow expansion to go ahead: Zac Goldsmith to make a statement tonight

In Richmond Park constituency the EURef split wasREMAIN 72%LEAVE 28%Zac was a leaver

Read the full story here

rcs1000

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

Anorak said:

Paristonda said:

Indigo said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Well well well

ttps://twitter.com/AllieRenison/status/790843662443941890

How very odd. It may or may not be unlawful for the UK, in what way is Australia bound by the provisions of the Lisbon and Maastricht Treaties ?

Perhaps the EU has applied pressure to Oz. They could still be dragged into any court issue even if they are not accused of any wrongdoing personally.

Also, playing nice with large trading blocs is the diplomatic thing to do, regardless of the strict legalities of a particular issue!!

Basically, but in a post-CETA failure world the EU will matter a lot less in global trade terms. If the EU can't get CETA through in the next year or so they may as well close up shop to the outside world.

I'm hearing a modified CETA may be agreed imminently.
We'll see.

This was agreed between the commission and Canada already and derailed by a few Belgians. I don't see what they can change to make it acceptable unless they gut it.

This is a new modification, apparently. It's a story from a tier one (US) investment bank, so I'm sure it has some basis in fact.

There are two ways it might work: one, it may be cut in scope so that the EU agrees it via QMV, or two, there may be concessions that satisfy the Waloons.

AlastairMeeks

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

GIN1138

Let's hope Zak makes a better "go" of his by election than his disaster of a Mayoral campaign...

rcs1000

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

Will he stand as a Conservative or an Independent?

If the latter, will the Conservatives stand against him?

Presumably the local Conservative Association will try and persuade him to remain true.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

619

Alistair said:


Speaking of Texas



https://twitter.com/KUT/status/790756623467675648

'Within Texas, Travis County is known as an exceptionally culturally "liberal" region and a stronghold of the Texas Democratic Party.[24] The county voted for the Democratic candidate in six of the most recent seven US Presidential elections (and its one vote for a Republican was for George W. Bush, the sitting Texas Governor). Few county-wide elected positions are even contested by Republican candidates.[25] In 2005 it was the only county in Texas to vote against the Proposition 2 state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_County,_Texas

Texan Dems are coming out early and hard...

[Deleted User]

Zac is an overall electoral liability for the Tories. An posh, OE, greeny, rich, entitled ecomentalist trustafarian. We just had a vote which essentially was a cry of frustration at elites seeking to look after their own and ignore the general needs of Joe Average. The Zac position is not a good look at all. Why did the Tories make a tool like this their candidate for London?

619

I think the Lib Dems, if they go hard on how Zac campaigned during the mayoral election and his LEAVE viewpoint, could well win, esp if they pick a popular local figure and if the Tories put someone up

CarlottaVance

So "dithering" May has done in 3 months what Cameron didn't do in 6 years....

dr_spyn

Zac takes flight.

https://twitter.com/BrianSpanner1/status/790867660686917632

williamglenn

rcs1000 said:

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

He will struggle to play down his 'ugly' mayoral campaign and pro-Brexit views. I think even as an Independent with no Tory candidate, the LDs would be favourites.

dr_spyn

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/790872339881877504

Sky infer that Goldsmith is taking flight.

AlastairMeeks

Richmond Park is the perfect constituency for a by-election for the Lib Dems: a Remain stronghold in which they have historical strength. It's a must-win for them. If not here, then where?

Anorak

FPT:

MaxPB said:

A move to pass by QMV would mean gutting it and there is no satisfying the Waloons. I'm sure the commission and Canada have made modifications, but then they also thought CETA would pass as is.

What odds a colossal EU grant lands in Wallonia within 12 months.

GIN1138

619 said:

I think the Lib Dems, if they go hard on how Zac campaigned during the mayoral election and his LEAVE viewpoint, could well win, esp if they pick a popular local figure and if the Tories put someone up

Yep, I think there's the chance of a Lib-Dem "spectacular" here. Zak's a fool... But we all knew that anyway.

CarlottaVance said:

So "dithering" May has done in 3 months what Cameron didn't do in 6 years....

Yep. So much for Theresa Maybe lol!

MaxPB

Alistair said:

I thought the Waloons objected to the ISDS component? Easy fix, get rid of the ISDS.

How will investor-state disputes be arbitrated then? I highly, highly doubt that Canada will accept ECJ arbitration and the EU will be unable to accept a transfer of sovereignty to Canada.

MP_SE

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

619

https://twitter.com/LOLGOP/status/790872026147917824

MaxPB

Anorak said:

FPT:

MaxPB said:

A move to pass by QMV would mean gutting it and there is no satisfying the Waloons. I'm sure the commission and Canada have made modifications, but then they also thought CETA would pass as is.

What odds a colossal EU grant lands in Wallonia within 12 months.

A bit of pork has never hurt anyone, but then again they still might not vote in favour given the strength of opposition to ISDS arbitration.

taffys

And so it begins.

Are the lib dems anti-heathrow expansion?

Barnesian

rcs1000 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

Will he stand as a Conservative or an Independent?

If the latter, will the Conservatives stand against him?

Presumably the local Conservative Association will try and persuade him to remain true.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and his majority is in the range +3000 to -1000.

JackW

Marc Caputo in an extensive article in "Politico" looks at worrying signs for Trump in Florida :

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/trump-clinton-florida-230275

GIN1138

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

GIN1138

Barnesian said:

rcs1000 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

Will he stand as a Conservative or an Independent?

If the latter, will the Conservatives stand against him?

Presumably the local Conservative Association will try and persuade him to remain true.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and his majority is in the range +3000 to -1000.

Why would the Tories do him a favour and not stand? If he runs as independent the Tories need to field their own candidate as usual.

IanB2

taffys said:

And so it begins.

Are the lib dems anti-heathrow expansion?

Always have been

taffys

''He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.''

The stakes for the lib dems are huge in that by-election. Zack has a huge majority. Imagine they lose.

williamglenn

MaxPB said:

Anorak said:

FPT:

MaxPB said:

A move to pass by QMV would mean gutting it and there is no satisfying the Waloons. I'm sure the commission and Canada have made modifications, but then they also thought CETA would pass as is.

What odds a colossal EU grant lands in Wallonia within 12 months.

A bit of pork has never hurt anyone, but then again they still might not vote in favour given the strength of opposition to ISDS arbitration.

A few years ago the European Commission put out a helpful guide about why investor-state dispute resolution is necessary - http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/october/tradoc_151790.pdf

taffys

''Always have been''

So the lib dem proposal for airport expansion is...??? Zero??

MikeSmithson

IanB2 said:

taffys said:

And so it begins.

Are the lib dems anti-heathrow expansion?

Always have been

Opposition to LHR3 was key part of the coalition negotiations after GE2010

Barnesian

GIN1138 said:

Barnesian said:

rcs1000 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

Will he stand as a Conservative or an Independent?

If the latter, will the Conservatives stand against him?

Presumably the local Conservative Association will try and persuade him to remain true.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and his majority is in the range +3000 to -1000.

Why would the Tories do him a favour and not stand? If he runs as independent the Tories need to field their own candidate as usual.

If they field their own candidate they'll be doing the LibDems a favour. Why would they do that?

Casino_Royale

Patrick said:

Zac is an overall electoral liability for the Tories. An posh, OE, greeny, rich, entitled ecomentalist trustafarian. We just had a vote which essentially was a cry of frustration at elites seeking to look after their own and ignore the general needs of Joe Average. The Zac position is not a good look at all. Why did the Tories make a tool like this their candidate for London?

But he is pretty much the ideal candidate for a place like Richmond, Brexit aside.

MaxPB

williamglenn said:

MaxPB said:

Anorak said:

FPT:

MaxPB said:

A move to pass by QMV would mean gutting it and there is no satisfying the Waloons. I'm sure the commission and Canada have made modifications, but then they also thought CETA would pass as is.

What odds a colossal EU grant lands in Wallonia within 12 months.

A bit of pork has never hurt anyone, but then again they still might not vote in favour given the strength of opposition to ISDS arbitration.

A few years ago the European Commission put out a helpful guide about why investor-state dispute resolution is necessary - http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/october/tradoc_151790.pdf

I know all of that, explain it to the Walloons.

Tissue_Price

AlastairMeeks said:

Richmond Park is the perfect constituency for a by-election for the Lib Dems: a Remain stronghold in which they have historical strength. It's a must-win for them. If not here, then where?

A by-election in Westmorland would probably be winnable and would do them a power of good.

MP_SE

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

JackW

National Weekly Tracker - NBC/Survey Monkey - Sample 32,225 - 17-23 Oct

Clinton 50 .. Trump 44

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/data-points/poll-republican-party-fractured-hillary-clinton-maintains-solid-lead-n672001

GIN1138

Barnesian said:

GIN1138 said:

Barnesian said:

rcs1000 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

Will he stand as a Conservative or an Independent?

If the latter, will the Conservatives stand against him?

Presumably the local Conservative Association will try and persuade him to remain true.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and his majority is in the range +3000 to -1000.

Why would the Tories do him a favour and not stand? If he runs as independent the Tories need to field their own candidate as usual.

If they field their own candidate they'll be doing the LibDems a favour. Why would they do that?

Because their (many) Conservative supporters in that constituency have the right to vote for a Conservative candidate?

You could make the argument all over the place that some parties shouldn't field candidates in certain seats at elections because it just helps boost a rival party but democracy needs to come first.

[Deleted User]

MikeSmithson said:

IanB2 said:

taffys said:

And so it begins.

Are the lib dems anti-heathrow expansion?

Always have been

Opposition to LHR3 was key part of the coalition negotiations after GE2010

Just as well the LibDems have largely disappeared. The country really needs airport capacity. New capacity that integrates with our existing capacity. The Heathrow decision is a good example of TINA. How will potential LibDem voters who don't live under the flight path view this NIMBYism? After Brexit and the future trade imperative it's even more vital than it already was to deliver two or three new runways. |Let's hope Gatwick2 and maybe Birmingham follow.

Barnesian

GIN1138 said:

Barnesian said:

GIN1138 said:

Barnesian said:

rcs1000 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

It seems to have been confirmed already that he's resigning:

https://twitter.com/Martha_Gill/status/790869680785416192

Will he stand as a Conservative or an Independent?

If the latter, will the Conservatives stand against him?

Presumably the local Conservative Association will try and persuade him to remain true.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and he is elected with a 5-7,000 majority.

My base case is that he runs as an Independent, the Conservatives do not stand, and his majority is in the range +3000 to -1000.

Why would the Tories do him a favour and not stand? If he runs as independent the Tories need to field their own candidate as usual.

If they field their own candidate they'll be doing the LibDems a favour. Why would they do that?

Because their (many) Conservative supporters in that constituency have the right to vote for a Conservative candidate?

You could make the argument all over the place that some parties should field candidates at elections because it just helps boost a rival party but democracy needs to come first.

I think realpolitik will come first.

GIN1138

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

Well in that case Zack should have no problem holding on to the seat but obviously the Lib-Dems are going to make hay while sun shines.

Good on them.

JackW

National Tracker - IBD/TIPP - Sample 874 - 19-24 Oct

Clinton 42 .. Trump 41

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/

Dadge

taffys said:

''Always have been''

So the lib dem proposal for airport expansion is...??? Zero??

"opposed to any expansion of Heathrow, Stansted, Gatwick or any new airport in the Thames Estuary, and ensuring no net increase in runways across the UK as a whole"

(passed at 2014 conference)

Barnesian

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

619

JackW said:

National Tracker - IBD/TIPP - Sample 874 - 19-24 Oct

Clinton 42 .. Trump 41

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/

HA.

And the last hope of the Trumpers disappear

IanB2

Richmond Remain = 69%
Kingston Remain = 62%

Edit/ and if Mike's figure above is accurate, the constituency is more Remain than both of the boroughs.

taffys

"opposed to any expansion of Heathrow, Stansted, Gatwick or any new airport in the Thames Estuary, and ensuring no net increase in runways across the UK as a whole"

Thanks,

The lib dems will be asked about this and I'm not sure it will be that popular, to be honest.

taffys

IanB2 said:

Richmond Remain = 69%
Kingston Remain = 62%

You guys better win this, then

[Deleted User]

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

peter_from_putney

Any odds available yet? It looks like Shadsy has sloped off for an early lunch.

if I were a betting man, I'd expect the odds in a three horse race to look something like the following:

Libdems ...................................... 1.5

Conservative ................................3.5

Goldsmith (in whatever guise) ..... 6.0

50/1 bar these 3.

williamglenn

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

MyBurningEars

Tissue_Price said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Richmond Park is the perfect constituency for a by-election for the Lib Dems: a Remain stronghold in which they have historical strength. It's a must-win for them. If not here, then where?

A by-election in Westmorland would probably be winnable and would do them a power of good.

I had a good giggle at that!!

Richard_Nabavi

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

rcs1000

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

Richard_Nabavi

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

I think he'd win either way.

Nigelb

619 said:

JackW said:

National Tracker - IBD/TIPP - Sample 874 - 19-24 Oct

Clinton 42 .. Trump 41

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/

HA.

And the last hope of the Trumpers disappear

Rigged, inevitably.

Sandpit

If Zac stands as an independent, the Tories have to stand someone against him. Not to do so, would give the green light to any other Tory MP resigning over something else they hold dear, whether it's one of the EU decisions or the boundary review.

Maybe a pro-expansion Conservative in Richmond would be kind enough to point out to the constituents that the proposed extension *North* of the existing airfield would lead to *Fewer* planes flying over Richmond itself.

SandyRentool

British Airways has more LHR slots than it knows what to do with. They don't have enough wide bodied aircraft to use their existing slots effectively and have to resort to 'slot sitting' with pointless flights to Leeds, Rotterdam, etc.

LHR just means more profits for the Spanish owners of the airport and more slots for the Middle East 3, US and Asian carriers, with increased noise, pollution and disruption in West and South West London.

On this, as well as Brexit, I agree with Zac.

Jonathan

So Witney was a good warm up act for the LDs after all.

TGOHF

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

Incumbent Nimby vs opportunistic Nimbys.

Surely it will be a fantastic contest full of ideas and national vision.....

[Deleted User]

williamglenn said:

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

Erm....no. I'm saying this is a good and sensible decision and the self interested bleating will not be broadly well received. I also think the LibDems setting themselves up as a party of modern Luddites opposed to any capacity expansion in a modern world is effing loopy.

IanB2

taffys said:

IanB2 said:

Richmond Remain = 69%
Kingston Remain = 62%

You guys better win this, then

Let's see who the opponents are. As a betting proposition I don't agree with Mike that the LibDems start as clear favourites, unless the Tories go against Goldsmith as well. He has a big majority, and his stance is bound to attract some respect (edit/ someone saying just that on LBC). Their best chance is to turn the by-election around to the Brexit issue, which will depend on what happens over coming weeks. A big jump in the next inflation figure is starting to look quite likely.

Jonathan

As we saw in the mayoral race Zac is an excellent campaigner. Oh hang on, no! The opposite of that. Zac could lose this.


LD choice is important.

shadsy

Ladbrokes:
4/6 Zac
6/4 LD
8 Cons (not Zac)

Tissue_Price

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

I think he'd win either way.

But not vs a Tory as well, surely?

The Government simply can't refuse to put up a candidate in a mainland by-election, imo [exceptions like Jo Cox notwithstanding]. Especially one called over Government policy. They would be open to well-deserved ridicule. So the question is whether Zac can be the Tory candidate or not, in the circumstances.

GIN1138

Patrick said:

williamglenn said:

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

Erm....no. I'm saying this is a good and sensible decision and the self interested bleating will not be broadly well received. I also think the LibDems setting themselves up as a party of modern Luddites opposed to any capacity expansion in a modern world is effing loopy.

I don't think the Lib's mind expanding railways (and bus/cycle lanes?) they are just opposed to plane and road expansion because of climate change?

MarqueeMark

dr_spyn said:

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/790872339881877504

Sky infer that Goldsmith is taking flight.

From which runway?

williamglenn

IanB2 said:

taffys said:

IanB2 said:

Richmond Remain = 69%
Kingston Remain = 62%

You guys better win this, then

Let's see who the opponents are. As a betting proposition I don't agree with Mike that the LibDems start as clear favourites, unless the Tories go against Goldsmith as well. He has a big majority, and his stance is bound to attract some respect (edit/ someone saying just that on LBC). Their best chance is to turn the by-election around to the Brexit issue, which will depend on what happens over coming weeks. A big jump in the next inflation figure is starting to look quite likely.

Elections are always about the future, not the past. Zac's electorate are not going to send him a thank you note for a failed futile gesture.

MaxPB

SandyRentool said:

British Airways has more LHR slots than it knows what to do with. They don't have enough wide bodied aircraft to use their existing slots effectively and have to resort to 'slot sitting' with pointless flights to Leeds, Rotterdam, etc.

LHR just means more profits for the Spanish owners of the airport and more slots for the Middle East 3, US and Asian carriers, with increased noise, pollution and disruption in West and South West London.

On this, as well as Brexit, I agree with Zac.

Spanish, British and Qatari last time I looked. Ferrovial are looking to sell up or list Heathrow as soon as the runway building commences according to the rumour mongers, so it could return to the LSE as a "British" company.

frpenkridge

Local politics.

Tissue_Price

shadsy said:

Ladbrokes:
4/6 Zac
6/4 LD
8 Cons (not Zac)

Bold of you to put this out before Zac's position is clear. Well done.

TGOHF

Tissue_Price said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

I think he'd win either way.

But not vs a Tory as well, surely?

The Government simply can't refuse to put up a candidate in a mainland by-election, imo [exceptions like Jo Cox notwithstanding]. Especially one called over Government policy. They would be open to well-deserved ridicule. So the question is whether Zac can be the Tory candidate or not, in the circumstances.

I don't see why he can't be - he isn't a minister and he agrees with most other policy.

If he wins he has a direct mandate to oppose LHR.

Richard_Nabavi

Jonathan said:

As we saw in the mayoral race Zac is an excellent campaigner. Oh hang on, no! The opposite of that. Zac could lose this.


LD choice is important.

He has been a really good campaigner in Richmond.

Pulpstar

I think 6-4 is generous.
Am on !

IanB2

TGOHF said:

Tissue_Price said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

I think he'd win either way.

But not vs a Tory as well, surely?

The Government simply can't refuse to put up a candidate in a mainland by-election, imo [exceptions like Jo Cox notwithstanding]. Especially one called over Government policy. They would be open to well-deserved ridicule. So the question is whether Zac can be the Tory candidate or not, in the circumstances.

I don't see why he can't be - he isn't a minister and he agrees with most other policy.

If he wins he has a direct mandate to oppose LHR.

A la Davis

TGOHF

So will we see Sadiq Khan campaigning for Zac in Richmond - I mean he's anti LHR isn't he ?

Richard_Nabavi

Tissue_Price said:

But not vs a Tory as well, surely?

The Government simply can't refuse to put up a candidate in a mainland by-election, imo [exceptions like Jo Cox notwithstanding]. Especially one called over Government policy. They would be open to well-deserved ridicule. So the question is whether Zac can be the Tory candidate or not, in the circumstances.

If there's a Tory candidate opposing him, it would depend who it is and their stance on LHR. I think he might still win.

MarqueeMark

There's precedent for him to stand again as a Tory - David Davis in the Haltemprice by-election. Zac actually has better grounds - he told the voters he would stand on the Tory Manifesto, but also a personal manifesto of opposing Heathrow expansion. Now he is asking the voters whether they still have the desire for him to represent them, given he has not been unsuccesful in one of the planks they voted him in as their MP.

He is still a Tory and nothing else has changed.

JackW

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,155 - 20-23 Oct

Clinton 53 .. Trump 41

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stressed-election-youve-company-poll/story?id=43024209

SirNorfolkPassmore

It's a very odd situation as ALL candidates will presumably be opposed to Heathrow expansion, and none of them will get their way. This will turn, firstly on whether the Tories stand and, secondly, whether the Lib Dems can shift the debate to things like Remain (this being one of the strongest Remain constituencies in the country).

I suspect the Tories won't stand, labeling it a "distraction" and that Goldsmith will justify Shadsy's odds. If they do, however, the Lib Dems are very much in it.

Richard_Nabavi

MarqueeMark said:

There's precedent for him to stand again as a Tory - David Davis in the Haltemprice by-election. Zac actually has better grounds - he told the voters he would stand on the Tory Manifesto, but also a personal manifesto of opposing Heathrow expansion. Now he is asking the voters whether they still have the desire for him to represent them, given he has not been unsuccesful in one of the planks they voted him in as their MP.

He is still a Tory and nothing else has changed.

Yes, exactly. It can be spun as asking for a renewed mandate to oppose LHR expansion but support the government in everything else. Of course, that assumes that he wants to play it that way and the party agrees.

peter_from_putney

Pulpstar said:

I think 6-4 is generous.
Am on !

Totally agree - I've lumped on the Yellow Team too!

DYOR ..... this is a tricky one to call.

corporeal

GIN1138 said:

Patrick said:

williamglenn said:

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

Erm....no. I'm saying this is a good and sensible decision and the self interested bleating will not be broadly well received. I also think the LibDems setting themselves up as a party of modern Luddites opposed to any capacity expansion in a modern world is effing loopy.

I don't think the Lib's mind expanding railways (and bus/cycle lanes?) they are just opposed to plane and road expansion because of climate change?

I'm somewhat at odds with party policy in that I'm in favour of expanded capacity at Heathrow. Nationally speaking I don't think we need more capacity, but we have too many small regional airports that could be better shifted onto trains etc.

Tissue_Price

Interesting to see disagreement [on betting matters] among some of pb's Big Beasts...

[Deleted User]

GIN1138 said:

Patrick said:

williamglenn said:

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

Erm....no. I'm saying this is a good and sensible decision and the self interested bleating will not be broadly well received. I also think the LibDems setting themselves up as a party of modern Luddites opposed to any capacity expansion in a modern world is effing loopy.

I don't think the Lib's mind expanding railways (and bus/cycle lanes?) they are just opposed to plane and road expansion because of climate change?

Loopy indeed. Cars and planes are getting significantly more efficient. If we had some decent energy policy we'd also be getting significantly cheaper electricity - which would enable a big electrification of cars (which current progress on storage will also enable).

If the LibDems were serious about carbon they'd advocate that we stop burying hydrocarbons in landfill in vast quantities (whilst simultaneously digging them out of the ground) and instead use the enormous massflow of waste to build large municipal waste / power facilities. Would make a much larger impact on CO2 than fiddling at the margins with aeroplane emissions.

PlatoSaid

JackW said:

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,155 - 20-23 Oct

Clinton 53 .. Trump 41

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stressed-election-youve-company-poll/story?id=43024209

Who launches a tracker poll with two weeks to go and a big D+ sample? It's laughable PR masquerading as hard news. ABC and NBC have ruined their credibility at this election.

IIRC Reagan was +10, who believes the entire US goes +12 for Hillary?

Pulpstar

peter_from_putney said:

Pulpstar said:

I think 6-4 is generous.
Am on !

Totally agree - I've lumped on the Yellow Team too!

DYOR ..... this is a tricky one to call.

It is a bet where my head and heart are firmly in alignment. Alot of people reckon this sort of bet should be avoided, but that's not actually technically correct.

I'm also in favour of Heathrow expansion, just to add that to the pot

Sandpit

Richard_Nabavi said:

MarqueeMark said:

There's precedent for him to stand again as a Tory - David Davis in the Haltemprice by-election. Zac actually has better grounds - he told the voters he would stand on the Tory Manifesto, but also a personal manifesto of opposing Heathrow expansion. Now he is asking the voters whether they still have the desire for him to represent them, given he has not been unsuccesful in one of the planks they voted him in as their MP.

He is still a Tory and nothing else has changed.

Yes, exactly. It can be spun as asking for a renewed mandate to oppose LHR expansion but support the government in everything else. Of course, that assumes that he wants to play it that way and the party agrees.

Yes, absolutely. But it also needs to be said in no uncertain terms that if he stands as an Indy he'll be expelled from the party and have a Conservative candidate stood against him.

TCPoliticalBetting

TGOHF said:

So will we see Sadiq Khan campaigning for Zac in Richmond - I mean he's anti LHR isn't he ?

He also promised to plant zillions of trees.

Chris

Sorry if this has already been posted, but there's an interesting discussion by Nate Silver of why his model is still giving Trump a 15% chance of winning, in contrast to others which are giving him only between 1% and 8% [though Betfair seems to think the right answer is 16%]:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-why-our-model-is-more-bullish-than-others-on-trump/?ex_cid=2016-forecast

Indigo

Tissue_Price said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

It is very unlikely indeed that the local Conservative association will want to field a candidate against Zac, or that they would choose any candidate who wasn't 100% opposed to the new runway. The choice is not just up to CCHQ, and it would be a declaration of war to try to impose a candidate. The political logic therefore points towards either Zac standing again as a Conservative, or him being unopposed by the Conservatives.

I suspect he loses as a conservative, and wins as an independent.

I think he'd win either way.

But not vs a Tory as well, surely?

The Government simply can't refuse to put up a candidate in a mainland by-election, imo [exceptions like Jo Cox notwithstanding]. Especially one called over Government policy. They would be open to well-deserved ridicule. So the question is whether Zac can be the Tory candidate or not, in the circumstances.

Tories should ask Rory Stewart if he would like to move to a London constituency, I am sure he would go down very nicely in Richmond, shame his own seat is so safe

TCPoliticalBetting

corporeal said:

GIN1138 said:

Patrick said:

williamglenn said:

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

Erm....no. I'm saying this is a good and sensible decision and the self interested bleating will not be broadly well received. I also think the LibDems setting themselves up as a party of modern Luddites opposed to any capacity expansion in a modern world is effing loopy.

I don't think the Lib's mind expanding railways (and bus/cycle lanes?) they are just opposed to plane and road expansion because of climate change?

I'm somewhat at odds with party policy in that I'm in favour of expanded capacity at Heathrow. Nationally speaking I don't think we need more capacity, but we have too many small regional airports that could be better shifted onto trains etc.

By the time Heathrow3 comes into service we will have driverless cars in use ferrying us to whatever airport is required at a fraction of the current taxi cost.

Jonathan

Richard_Nabavi said:

MarqueeMark said:

There's precedent for him to stand again as a Tory - David Davis in the Haltemprice by-election. Zac actually has better grounds - he told the voters he would stand on the Tory Manifesto, but also a personal manifesto of opposing Heathrow expansion. Now he is asking the voters whether they still have the desire for him to represent them, given he has not been unsuccesful in one of the planks they voted him in as their MP.

He is still a Tory and nothing else has changed.

Yes, exactly. It can be spun as asking for a renewed mandate to oppose LHR expansion but support the government in everything else. Of course, that assumes that he wants to play it that way and the party agrees.

Maybe he should pay for the costs of the election. He can afford it.

Mortimer

If any markets open before we know of Zac's intention, laying the LDs would surely make the most sense....


DYOR.

david_herdson

GIN1138 said:

Patrick said:

williamglenn said:

Patrick said:

Barnesian said:

MP_SE said:

GIN1138 said:

MP_SE said:

Farron comes across as a complete tosser. I have seen better politics back in my JCR days.

Harry Cole
Harry Cole‏ @MrHarryCole

And so it begins. @timfarron says "@ZacGoldsmith has failed Richmond Park on Heathrow and betrayed them on Brexit."
25 Oct 2016, 11:59 am

What's wrong with that? Looks like good politics to me... Zak is giving the Lib-Dems an open goal to pull off a spectacular.

He'll be out on his ear, the Lib's will have a ninth MP and the third runway will be built anyway.

Like I said. He's a fool. The only plus side is that the Tories will have one less "loose cannon" to worry about.

Goldsmith has tirelessly campaigned against the expansion of Heathrow and his Eurosceptic views have been known about for years. If anything the Tory party has failed the residents of Richmond but Goldsmith certainly hasn't.

The by election will be a verdict on the Government (Brexit and Heathrow expansion) not on Zac.

The by election will be a verdict on what rich, metropolitan, lefty, Nimby elites in a leafy part of London think about Brexit and the potential impact on the value of their multi-million pound houses. Not a lot I expect. Ask what people in Nuneaton think.

Are you calling on Marcus Jones to resign his seat so we can ask them?

Erm....no. I'm saying this is a good and sensible decision and the self interested bleating will not be broadly well received. I also think the LibDems setting themselves up as a party of modern Luddites opposed to any capacity expansion in a modern world is effing loopy.

I don't think the Lib's mind expanding railways (and bus/cycle lanes?) they are just opposed to plane and road expansion because of climate change?

So they'd only run public transport at peak hours then? Because busses with three people on are so environmently friendly.

Chris

PlatoSaid said:

JackW said:

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,155 - 20-23 Oct

Clinton 53 .. Trump 41

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stressed-election-youve-company-poll/story?id=43024209

Who launches a tracker poll with two weeks to go and a big D+ sample? It's laughable PR masquerading as hard news. ABC and NBC have ruined their credibility at this election.

I think we'll have to wait for the result to see who has ruined their credibility. ;-)

Indigo

Patrick said:

Loopy indeed. Cars and planes are getting significantly more efficient. If we had some decent energy policy we'd also be getting significantly cheaper electricity - which would enable a big electrification of cars (which current progress on storage will also enable).

If the LibDems were serious about carbon they'd advocate that we stop burying hydrocarbons in landfill in vast quantities (whilst simultaneously digging them out of the ground) and instead use the enormous massflow of waste to build large municipal waste / power facilities. Would make a much larger impact on CO2 than fiddling at the margins with aeroplane emissions.

Just about all UK energy policy is fiddling at the margins for effect, in global terms we are less than a rounding error, completely dwarfed by even single components of other countries energy policies. Its just large and expensive virtue signalling.

I'll get my coat now

Sandpit

Miss @PlatoSaid, your link on the last thread from that darling of the liberal left Michael Moore, about what is driving Trump's support, is very powerful indeed.

There's a whole load of Middle America who have literally nothing left to lose.

The election's not over yet.

https://mobile.twitter.com/JaredWyand/status/790707670776811522 (NSFW audio)

Pulpstar

Mortimer said:

If any markets open before we know of Zac's intention, laying the LDs would surely make the most sense....


DYOR.

Are you dutching Zac and the Tories with Shadsy ?

edmundintokyo

PlatoSaid said:

JackW said:

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,155 - 20-23 Oct

Clinton 53 .. Trump 41

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stressed-election-youve-company-poll/story?id=43024209

Who launches a tracker poll with two weeks to go and a big D+ sample? It's laughable PR masquerading as hard news. ABC and NBC have ruined their credibility at this election.

IIRC Reagan was +10, who believes the entire US goes +12 for Hillary?

There's a chunk of habitual Republican voters who identify as independents, so demographically balanced samples will have significantly more Democrats than Republicans. On top of that, Trump isn't universally popular among GOP supporters, some of whom are telling pollsters they're going to sit this one out.

dr_spyn

Will Labour also field a nimby to fight Heathrow expansion?

They have some form in West London.

http://www.john-mcdonnell.net/third_runway_campaign

Alistair

PlatoSaid said:

JackW said:

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,155 - 20-23 Oct

Clinton 53 .. Trump 41

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stressed-election-youve-company-poll/story?id=43024209

Who launches a tracker poll with two weeks to go and a big D+ sample? It's laughable PR masquerading as hard news. ABC and NBC have ruined their credibility at this election.

IIRC Reagan was +10, who believes the entire US goes +12 for Hillary?

http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/political-attitudes/party-identification/

619

edmundintokyo said:

PlatoSaid said:

JackW said:

National Tracker - Langer Research/ABC - Sample 1,155 - 20-23 Oct

Clinton 53 .. Trump 41

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stressed-election-youve-company-poll/story?id=43024209

Who launches a tracker poll with two weeks to go and a big D+ sample? It's laughable PR masquerading as hard news. ABC and NBC have ruined their credibility at this election.

IIRC Reagan was +10, who believes the entire US goes +12 for Hillary?

There's a chunk of habitual Republican voters who identify as independents, so demographically balanced samples will have significantly more Democrats than Republicans. On top of that, Trump isn't universally popular among GOP supporters, some of whom are telling pollsters they're going to sit this one out.

Dont you know its a plot by the MSM and Clinton to make it look like she is winning

OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE