Even the pro-Clinton Nate Silver who works with averages admits it is tightening.
Is he "pro-Clinton"? Or do you just mean you don't like the results of his model.
He was hopelessly awry about Bernie Sanders for months because he allows his bias to cloud his judgement. He similarly got the Trump nomination wrong and underestimated his support.
he said Clinton would win against sanders. And she did. Sanders wa always running behind Clinton
On Trump, he said his mistake was too ignore the polls and go with his opinion.
Even the pro-Clinton Nate Silver who works with averages admits it is tightening.
Is he "pro-Clinton"? Or do you just mean you don't like the results of his model.
Anyhow, his projected lead for Clinton had tightened a bit - as of yesterday, it had dropped by 1 percentage point over a week and a half. But today it has gone back up by half a percentage point. With 12 days to go and with early voting in full swing, that kind of movement isn't going to make much difference. There has to be a large, systematic error in the polls for Trump to win.
Depends which polls, Trump leads with the LA Times and just a point behind with Rasmussen and IBID TIPP. Bloomberg yesterday had him ahead in Florida and he leads in Iowa and Ohio in the RCP poll average
Mr. Putney, that made me go check how my spread suggestions were doing. The last race buggered all but one of them, I fear. Humbug.
Yep .... spread-betting is scarey. That said, I'm quite hopeful of my buy of Clinton's ECVs at 329. I'm reasonably confident that there's limited realistic downside of perhaps around 25-30 ECVs and maybe potential upside of around 40-45 ECVs. But that's only MY OPINION !
Stand back and await much egg on face.
It's essential that anyone playing these markets should do their own careful research, especially as regards assessing their maximum acceptable risk.
Reporter: "And we're live from New York, lets take the pulse of the big Apple" John (Middle aged black man from Brooklyn) : "Well I was going to vote Hillary, but in the booth I just found my pen marking the Trump box" Reporter: "It seems John was not alone, and that is why we are projecting Trump to gain all of New York's Electoral college votes in what looks like a historic unprecedented landslide".
What May is proposing is a hell of alot more complicated (times 1000) than the likes of Germany simply
Tough sh!t.
Exauntry will lose their contributions to our economy.
Tough shit. You said it.
And I can tell you pal of poor unskilled Eastern European migration to the area I live ,so don't go there on thinking everything is alright with mass poor Eastern European immigration.
Says the Guy living in Italy - yes tough shit.
So who looks after the old people in those homes when the Eastern Europeans can no longer do it? Are you happy to pay the additional tax to ensure that locals do it at a wage they can live on?
Who said the Eastern Europeans can't do it ?
We don't even know what deal we have on immigration yet,it could be a deal that you must have a job here first and then nothing changes in that sector.
If you want to end unskilled jobs for immigrants then Eastern Europeans will not be able to get jobs doing the menial work in care homes.
Unskilled with no jobs would do me.
Robots will do all this shit, quite soon, anyway. Literally.
So much of this debate is redundant. Uber are trialling driverless lorries. Now.
Automation will also affect bankers, accountants and even doctors and ee. Goodnight
I can't imagine a worse fate for humanity than to be replaced by robots. Imagine a world in which strength, intelligence and virtue count for nothing, and we're just a bunch of pampered slobs. Surely, the robots would just slaughter such useless drones.
You can still be intelligent and read and research and keep your strength up through exercise, just more of the day to day jobs would be done by robots. Of course robots could eventually develop consciousness and on some theories of the singularity even merge with humans
Mr. Putney, that made me go check how my spread suggestions were doing. The last race buggered all but one of them, I fear. Humbug.
Yep .... spread-betting is scarey. That said, I'm quite hopeful of my buy of Clinton's ECVs at 329. I'm reasonably confident that there's limited realistic downside of perhaps around 25-30 ECVs and maybe potential upside of around 40-45 ECVs. But that's only MY OPINION !
Stand back and await much egg on face.
It's essential that anyone playing these markets should do their own careful research, especially as regards assessing their maximum acceptable risk.
Reporter: "And we're live from New York, lets take the pulse of the big Apple" John (Middle aged black man from Brooklyn) : "Well I was going to vote Hillary, but in the booth I just found my pen marking the Trump box" Reporter: "It seems John was not alone, and that is why we are projecting Trump to gain all of New York's Electoral college votes in what looks like a historic unprecedented landslide".
That's why we use pencils in the UK. Pens have a - dim - mind of their own...
Mr. Putney, that made me go check how my spread suggestions were doing. The last race buggered all but one of them, I fear. Humbug.
Yep .... spread-betting is scarey. That said, I'm quite hopeful of my buy of Clinton's ECVs at 329. I'm reasonably confident that there's limited realistic downside of perhaps around 25-30 ECVs and maybe potential upside of around 40-45 ECVs. But that's only MY OPINION !
Stand back and await much egg on face.
It's essential that anyone playing these markets should do their own careful research, especially as regards assessing their maximum acceptable risk.
Reporter: "And we're live from New York, lets take the pulse of the big Apple" John (Middle aged black man from Brooklyn) : "Well I was going to vote Hillary, but in the booth I just found my pen marking the Trump box" Reporter: "It seems John was not alone, and that is why we are projecting Trump to gain all of New York's Electoral college votes in what looks like a historic unprecedented landslide".
Yes, a £1 a point spread bet at 330 ECVs can *theoretically* cost £330 you if it all goes horribly wrong. Where spread bets lie, there be dragons.
Mr. Sandpit, [incidentally, hope you saw the post below and didn't have to trawl the threads], that's something I'll be considering carefully when I make my first spread bets. The maximum potential loss is something of which I'll be very wary.
Mr. Putney, that made me go check how my spread suggestions were doing. The last race buggered all but one of them, I fear. Humbug.
Yep .... spread-betting is scarey. That said, I'm quite hopeful of my buy of Clinton's ECVs at 329. I'm reasonably confident that there's limited realistic downside of perhaps around 25-30 ECVs and maybe potential upside of around 40-45 ECVs. But that's only MY OPINION !
Stand back and await much egg on face.
It's essential that anyone playing these markets should do their own careful research, especially as regards assessing their maximum acceptable risk.
Reporter: "And we're live from New York, lets take the pulse of the big Apple" John (Middle aged black man from Brooklyn) : "Well I was going to vote Hillary, but in the booth I just found my pen marking the Trump box" Reporter: "It seems John was not alone, and that is why we are projecting Trump to gain all of New York's Electoral college votes in what looks like a historic unprecedented landslide".
Well, there's always California to keep me solvent .... just. See you in the workhouse!
Scott Adams continues to be a great read, I can't understand why so many don't get what and why he's doing this. Everything is taken out of context and used by each side as it suits them.
To read his blog—and I recently spent a week mainlining the 1,000-plus pages that he’s published in the 15 months since Trump declared his candidacy—is to overdose on a custom blend of testosterone, paranoia, and self-celebration. Here he is explaining that in the event of a Trump victory, he, Adams, “would be a top-ten assassination target.” Here he is lamenting the “humiliation of the American male,” as evidenced by a dishwasher detergent ad. Here he is unforgettably (I’ve tried) attempting to hypnotize his readers into having the best orgasms of their lives (“I want you wet, or hard, and especially obedient …”).
I think you're missing the point, he's deliberately taking positions and seeing how his readership reacts. He's endorsed Trump to provoke the Establishment and got it in spades. He then endorsed What's Aleppo for safety reasons and now moved again. And each time he's identified a hit point that provoked a big reaction. It's fascinating psychological warfare - I really don't know what he genuinely believes.
Scott Adams continues to be a great read, I can't understand why so many don't get what and why he's doing this. Everything is taken out of context and used by each side as it suits them.
To read his blog—and I recently spent a week mainlining the 1,000-plus pages that he’s published in the 15 months since Trump declared his candidacy—is to overdose on a custom blend of testosterone, paranoia, and self-celebration. Here he is explaining that in the event of a Trump victory, he, Adams, “would be a top-ten assassination target.” Here he is lamenting the “humiliation of the American male,” as evidenced by a dishwasher detergent ad. Here he is unforgettably (I’ve tried) attempting to hypnotize his readers into having the best orgasms of their lives (“I want you wet, or hard, and especially obedient …”).
I think you're missing the point, he's deliberately taking positions and seeing how his readership reacts. He's endorsed Trump to provoke the Establishment and got it in spades. He then endorsed What's Aleppo for safety reasons and now moved again. And each time he's identified a hit point that provoked a big reaction. It's fascinating psychological warfare - I really don't know what he genuinely believes.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
"In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%."
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Mr. Sandpit, [incidentally, hope you saw the post below and didn't have to trawl the threads], that's something I'll be considering carefully when I make my first spread bets. The maximum potential loss is something of which I'll be very wary.
Yes, thanks for reposting. Nothing that stands out particularly as huge value, but will take a better look in the afternoon as well as rewatching the highlights of last year's race.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
A decrease of 1.4% in construction leaves lots of rooms for upward revisions. When on earth are they going to sort that series out? According the ONS the last brickie went back to Poland last year sometime in disgust.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Just 0.5% in a quarter ? I blame Brexit ..
0.5% growth. Now who predicted 0.6%? Who was that again?
Looks like it was the creatives who kept us growing.
"Growth in the transport, storage and communication industries in Quarter 3 2016 increased by 2.2% compared with 0.6% in Quarter 2 2016 and was the main reason behind the increase in services growth between the 2 quarters. This is the fastest growth in transport, storage and communication industries since Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2009; growth was primarily driven by the motion picture, video and TV programme production, sound recording and music publishing activities, and computer programming industries. "
Good to see the huge services GDP figure. Manufacturing is laggier and should start to come back in Q4 and Q1 as the exchange rates start to work through the supply chain.
Mr. Sandpit, although the official F1 site is now mostly rubbish, it does have last year's pole lap by Rosberg up there, which is useful for getting a feel for the circuit.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Comfortably better than expected, resulting in a handy uplift in the FTSE Indices.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Just 0.5% in a quarter ? I blame Brexit ..
0.5% growth. Now who predicted 0.6%? Who was that again?
I predicted 0.5% if that is any help to you. TBH there is more than a bit of luck in it though since services did better and manufacturing worse than I expected.
Even the pro-Clinton Nate Silver who works with averages admits it is tightening.
Is he "pro-Clinton"? Or do you just mean you don't like the results of his model.
Anyhow, his projected lead for Clinton had tightened a bit - as of yesterday, it had dropped by 1 percentage point over a week and a half. But today it has gone back up by half a percentage point. With 12 days to go and with early voting in full swing, that kind of movement isn't going to make much difference. There has to be a large, systematic error in the polls for Trump to win.
Depends which polls, Trump leads with the LA Times and just a point behind with Rasmussen and IBID TIPP. Bloomberg yesterday had him ahead in Florida and he leads in Iowa and Ohio in the RCP poll average
Yes, Trump may be leading in Iowa and Ohio (or he may not), but that in itself would be nothing like enough to give him the presidency. Apart from that, you are selecting a small number of more favourable polls. I'm talking about the polls in general.
But setting the polls aside, at about 1am I posted a link to some early voting figures, including 2012/2016 comparisons for Iowa, Nevada and Arizona. On the whole, the comparison seems less favourable to Trump than the polls are. (Arizona seems a little better for Trump, Iowa a little worse, and Nevada quite a lot worse.) But the comparison I did was very rough-and-ready. Do you see any sign in those figures of a large pro-Trump vote that the polls (in general) are failing to pick up?
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Just 0.5% in a quarter ? I blame Brexit ..
0.5% growth. Now who predicted 0.6%? Who was that again?
I predicted 0.5% if that is any help to you. TBH there is more than a bit of luck in it though since services did better and manufacturing worse than I expected.
What will be funny is comparing Q3 UK growth to Q3 EU growth. Even in the midst of Brexit we'll still probably out perform most of the continent.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Just 0.5% in a quarter ? I blame Brexit ..
0.5% growth. Now who predicted 0.6%? Who was that again?
I predicted 0.5% if that is any help to you. TBH there is more than a bit of luck in it though since services did better and manufacturing worse than I expected.
What will be funny is comparing Q3 UK growth to Q3 EU growth. Even in the midst of Brexit we'll still probably out perform most of the continent.
Labour rightly are villified for failing to stamp out anti-semitism in their party but the Lib Dems have a couple of people condoning anti-semites which they fail to remove from the membership. At some point the broadcast media are going to wake up and skewer Farron on it.
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
Just 0.5% in a quarter ? I blame Brexit ..
0.5% growth. Now who predicted 0.6%? Who was that again?
I predicted 0.5% if that is any help to you. TBH there is more than a bit of luck in it though since services did better and manufacturing worse than I expected.
What will be funny is comparing Q3 UK growth to Q3 EU growth. Even in the midst of Brexit we'll still probably out perform most of the continent.
As someone in one of the creative 'professions' I can tell you with regard to Brexit nothing much has changed. When it is implimented and the UK stops being the centre for pan european advertising as it might things could change very fast. Advertising is a bellwether.
"In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%."
Comments
On Trump, he said his mistake was too ignore the polls and go with his opinion.
https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats
Democrat Vote By Mail requests (returned and not combined) now exceed Republican.
WATCH: Jews Blamed For Holocaust at Event Hosted By Top Richmond LibDem Jenny Tonge [VIDEO] https://t.co/yGgJfYHoqc https://t.co/OsaUAjn3RP
Reporter: "And we're live from New York, lets take the pulse of the big Apple"
John (Middle aged black man from Brooklyn) : "Well I was going to vote Hillary, but in the booth I just found my pen marking the Trump box"
Reporter: "It seems John was not alone, and that is why we are projecting Trump to gain all of New York's Electoral college votes in what looks like a historic unprecedented landslide".
Clinton 42 .. Trump 45
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/10/27/uttt-poll-trump-holds-narrow-lead-over-clinton/
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/26/13418304/alex-jones-jewish-mafia
Is Trump going to have to visit Texas to preserve it?
Clinton 44.5 .. Trump 45.2
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%.
"In Quarter 3 2016, the services industries increased by 0.8%. In contrast, output decreased in the other 3 main industrial groups with construction decreasing by 1.4%, agriculture decreasing by 0.7% and production decreasing by 0.4%, within which manufacturing decreased by 1.0%."
http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/bulletins/grossdomesticproductpreliminaryestimate/julytosept2016#main-points
http://tinyurl.com/hva73qt
Services make up 78.8% of our economy.
1. Mike Pence having been dispatched yesterday to shore up Utah is today off to Omaha to fend off Clinton in NE CD02.
2. Clinton campaign moving resources from Nevada to Arizona as it considers the former is moving comfortably into their column.
"Growth in the transport, storage and communication industries in Quarter 3 2016 increased by 2.2% compared with 0.6% in Quarter 2 2016 and was the main reason behind the increase in services growth between the 2 quarters. This is the fastest growth in transport, storage and communication industries since Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2009; growth was primarily driven by the motion picture, video and TV programme production, sound recording and music publishing activities, and computer programming industries. "
Regarding interest-rates: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOMvs_1UFCk
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/23/how-margaret-thatchers-big-bang-could-protect-the-city-from-brex/
But setting the polls aside, at about 1am I posted a link to some early voting figures, including 2012/2016 comparisons for Iowa, Nevada and Arizona. On the whole, the comparison seems less favourable to Trump than the polls are. (Arizona seems a little better for Trump, Iowa a little worse, and Nevada quite a lot worse.) But the comparison I did was very rough-and-ready. Do you see any sign in those figures of a large pro-Trump vote that the polls (in general) are failing to pick up?
NEW THREAD
UK GDP grew 2.3% Y/Y in 3Q, fastest since Q2 2015 #Brexit
Andrew Neil
Growth of 0.5% in Q3 exactly official forecast at March Budget -- before Project Fear overtook Treasury forecasts. Back to the Future.
These Continuity Osborne PBers are so transparent.