Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
What a load of drivel . Look at the vote shares in all September council by elections
Why should we?
(a) that's old data (b) it's a few thousand votes in meaningless council by elections.
Yes sorry those are the October figures Con and UKIP did exceed 33% in September . It is 50,000 real votes in a full range of council areas from big cities to rural areas .
What a load of drivel . Look at the vote shares in all September council by elections
Why should we?
(a) that's old data (b) it's a few thousand votes in meaningless council by elections.
Yes sorry those are the October figures Con and UKIP did exceed 33% in September . It is 50,000 real votes in a full range of council areas from big cities to rural areas .
Yes, a few thousand votes in meaningless council by elections.
1) "The lies Trump told this week: from Mosul 'disaster' to leaked Clinton emails - Not even two weeks into the battle for Mosul, Trump has declared it 'a total disaster'. Commanders have disagreed."
2) "Islamic State fighters have taken 'tens of thousands' of people hostage and are herding them towards the city of Mosul for use as human shields as the battle for the militant group's last major Iraqi stronghold intensifies, the United Nations has said"
1) Commentary is free. 2) Facts are sacred.
Will the US and the US-backed Kurdish forces continue their assault on the city, provoking Daesh to start murdering tens of thousands of civilians and post film of their actions to the internet, or will they call it off?
The next 11 days may well be a "disaster" for Obama and Clinton's foreign policy image.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
That's a good summary. Polls are all over the place, the media have all taken sides to an extent not seen before, there's still the possibility of 'events' helping or (more likely) hindering either candidate even into the last fortnight.
In theory Hillary is 3-4 points up and probably wins the EC votes she needs, in practice it could still be anything from a landslide to a Trump win - in the last couple of days it seems to be swinging towards the Republican, but it's most likely too little too late.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
No it's not. Key is getting a representative sample.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
With regards to your 10000 vs 100. Yes.
With you regards of polling ratio between the US and UK. No.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
With regards to your 10000 vs 100. Yes.
With you regards of polling ratio between the US and UK. No.
No.
Three times No.
The point being, as we have had with LA Times / Black man in Illinois voting Trump saga, is that on a small sample (which most of these polls are), you can get big distortions.
1) "The lies Trump told this week: from Mosul 'disaster' to leaked Clinton emails - Not even two weeks into the battle for Mosul, Trump has declared it 'a total disaster'. Commanders have disagreed."
2) "Islamic State fighters have taken 'tens of thousands' of people hostage and are herding them towards the city of Mosul for use as human shields as the battle for the militant group's last major Iraqi stronghold intensifies, the United Nations has said"
1) Commentary is free. 2) Facts are sacred.
Will the US and the US-backed Kurdish forces continue their assault on the city, provoking Daesh to start murdering tens of thousands of civilians and post film of their actions to the internet, or will they call it off?
The next 11 days may well be a "disaster" for Obama and Clinton's foreign policy image.
That would give a lot of momentum to Trump, who hasn't concentrated much on that area. (If memory serves, he didn't mention Benghazi at any of the three presidential debates). And the "message" could be associated with some horrendously affecting images.
"Yeah the vote is very different this year. The Dems have come out hard on mail, but they are doing disproportionately worse so far in-person so it isn't as good for them as it would appear at first glance.
Brokenwheel, could you send me the links to where you are getting the Florida data - I would be interested to take a look.
This is the cumulative early vote scores. The ~7am updates have the full data up to the end of the previous day and after that they are periodically updated, mostly just the mail votes. I've been taking note of the daily changes.
"Yeah the vote is very different this year. The Dems have come out hard on mail, but they are doing disproportionately worse so far in-person so it isn't as good for them as it would appear at first glance.
"
Brokenwheel, could you send me the links to where you are getting the Florida data - I would be interested to take a look.
This is the cumulative early vote scores. The ~7am updates have the full data up to the end of the previous day and after that they are periodically updated, mostly just the mail votes. I've been taking note of the daily changes.
Sorry to mention assassination again - but does anyone know what would happen if a candidate croaks once postal voting has already started?
Kaine or Pence would quickly head in from 1000.0 on Betfair would be my guess.
But if votes are already cast for a dead candidate then the election is surely void? Don't they have to start again? Or does the VP candidate legally assume the full candidacy? Would make hanging chads look like a breeze.
The rules probably vary by state.
As a general rule, *everything* in the US varies by state.
The FBI is probing new emails related to Hillary Clinton, FBI Director James Comey said in a Friday letter.
"In previous congressional testimony, I referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server. Due to recent developments, I am writing to supplement my previous testimony," Comey wrote.
"In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation," he added.
"Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be signifcant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony,"
What a load of drivel . Look at the vote shares in all September council by elections
Con 24.2% minus 4.9% Lab 28.4% plus 0.2% LDem 18.6% plus 8.3% UKIP 6.2% minus 4.0% Green 4.8% minus 1.6% Nats 7.1% plus 3.3% Others/Ind 10.6% minus 1.3%
The 2 right wing parties could not even get 1/3rd of the votes between them
A tiny, unscientific, meaningless sample. You could just as easily argue either or both of the following:
1. That the Lib Dems are experiencing a dead cat bounce - the scale of "recovery" that the Conservatives had in the years immediately after 1997, where they were simply clawing back some of the more extreme losses of the immediately preceding years. (Although, that said, the rebuilding of the Tory local government base under Hague was vastly more impressive than the feeble effort that the yellows put in in May. And the Tories didn't ship two thirds of their entire vote in 1997, either.) 2. That people are willing to vote for any old protest party in a local by-election (where nothing, or at most the frequency of bin collections, is perceived to be at stake.) As distinct from a Parliamentary by-election, let alone a General Election.
I will start to believe in the Lib Dem Fightback when there is consistent evidence of a significant recovery in the national VI figures, and not before.
Little Green Mohammed Well you did call everyone who you don't agree with as Nazis .. I'm surprised you are bleating that he refused you https://t.co/Q1WuSJSPsh
Lily Allen Just tried to get in a black cab with my kids. The driver looked at me and said , 'find an immigrant to drive you you stupid tart'
Stone. Heart. Laugh.
Not really, rude and classless is what I'd call it... Sad to see discourse descending to this level.
Anyway back from the races and my tip this morning Charbel romped in at 7-2. Got 5-1 on course so time for a glass or two now.
And so, to modify my original question, if the Liberal Democrats can't win in Richmond Park then where do they go next?
You seem to have developed a huge hostility to the LDs despite admitting having voted for the party in the past. I don't really understand the source or rationale behind your antipathy.
I'm more irritated by the Lib Dems at the moment than anything else. It doesn't bother me that the leadership is disappointed by the EU referendum result, but it does rather grate to have this hardline, defiance of the electorate angle peddled by the leader (against the better advice, on this subject anyway, of figures like Vince Cable.) The centre of gravity in British politics (south of the Tweed at least) has shifted somewhat rightwards, against which backdrop the reflexive reaction against Clegg and in favour of becoming an Ed Miliband tribute act seems peculiarly self-defeating, even if it is understandable after what happened to them last year.
They're essentially turning their backs on soft centre-right voters and concentrating instead on trying to win back a tiny cohort of middle-class lefties who fulfil all of the following criteria: (a) liked EdM (b) don't like Corbyn (c) are willing to forgive them for the Coalition. It's a recipe for disaster. In almost any likely scenario about 5 in 6 of Labour's 2015 vote is probably safe, and of the 5% of the total electorate who might potentially dump Labour a substantial fraction will be Lab-Ukip or Lab-Con switchers. The LDs can also target the Greens with this strategy, but their vote is too small to make much difference to anything.
I guess it just seems like such a waste. The main Opposition is the accursed, Far Left, Zombie Labour, shambling uselessly across the political landscape. It is a democratic necessity that it be replaced with something better, and this would be a great deal quicker and easier to accomplish if the LDs were to provide the nucleus of a viable alternative - effectively, so that we can set about reversing what happened a century ago and replace Labour with the Liberals. Instead, they seem to be intent on following five years behind Labour - creating a social democrat party at the very moment when the soft Left is in serious decline in most of Europe. They're on a hiding to nothing.
I take it this is in response to some of the pro-Blair rhetoric that Tim Farron was using to try to peel off soft Labourites? Personally, as an Orange Book Lib Dem, I've been pleasantly surprised by Farron so far. He's positioned the party correctly, in my opinion, with regard to the refugee crisis, Europe and immigration. There's no sign of Miliband-style half arsed economic tinkering. For non-nationalist, pro-market Tory voters I'd have thought that the Lib Dems would be quite appealing at the moment.
And so, to modify my original question, if the Liberal Democrats can't win in Richmond Park then where do they go next?
I'm more irritated by the Lib Dems at the moment than anything else. It doesn't bother me that the leadership is disappointed by the EU referendum result, but it does rather grate to have this hardline, defiance of the electorate angle peddled by the leader (against the better advice, on this subject anyway, of figures like Vince Cable.) The centre of gravity in British politics (south of the Tweed at least) has shifted somewhat rightwards, against which backdrop the reflexive reaction against Clegg and in favour of becoming an Ed Miliband tribute act seems peculiarly self-defeating, even if it is understandable after what happened to them last year.
They're essentially turning their backs on soft centre-right voters and concentrating instead on trying to win back a tiny cohort of middle-class lefties who fulfil all of the following criteria: (a) liked EdM (b) don't like Corbyn (c) are willing to forgive them for the Coalition. It's a recipe for disaster. In almost any likely scenario about 5 in 6 of Labour's 2015 vote is probably safe, and of the 5% of the total electorate who might potentially dump Labour a substantial fraction will be Lab-Ukip or Lab-Con switchers. The LDs can also target the Greens with this strategy, but their vote is too small to make much difference to anything.
I guess it just seems like such a waste. The main Opposition is the accursed, Far Left, Zombie Labour, shambling uselessly across the political landscape. It is a democratic necessity that it be replaced with something better, and this would be a great deal quicker and easier to accomplish if the LDs were to provide the nucleus of a viable alternative - effectively, so that we can set about reversing what happened a century ago and replace Labour with the Liberals. Instead, they seem to be intent on following five years behind Labour - creating a social democrat party at the very moment when the soft Left is in serious decline in most of Europe. They're on a hiding to nothing.
I take it this is in response to some of the pro-Blair rhetoric that Tim Farron was using to try to peel off soft Labourites? Personally, as an Orange Book Lib Dem, I've been pleasantly surprised by Farron so far. He's positioned the party correctly, in my opinion, with regard to the refugee crisis, Europe and immigration. There's no sign of Miliband-style half arsed economic tinkering. For non-nationalist, pro-market Tory voters I'd have thought that the Lib Dems would be quite appealing at the moment.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Lib Dems have been infiltrated by the Social Democrat Party and veered away from liberal principles.
Lib Dems need to return to Gladstone's Liberals.
Gladstonian liberalism consisted of limited government expenditure and low taxation whilst making sure government had balanced budgets and the classical liberal stress on self-help and freedom of choice. Gladstonian liberalism also emphasised free trade, little government intervention in the economy and equality of opportunity through institutional reform.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
I'd agree. The question is how many votes it will swing, either from her to Trump or, more likely, from her to no-one.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
C'mon "The Donald" beat these crooks into the ground
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
I have to admit it looks very odd. Looking at the letter, my (un)educated guess is that his hand was forced by his agents who threatened to go public. Otherwise, I do not see why Comey would put his position at risk if the view is that HRC will win.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
Realistically, no. Virginia is gone in early voting. Colorado, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania have such big leads that it is hard to see how he can overcome them not to mention these States have large numbers of uni educated whites. There are no paths to 270 when Clinton wins these.
Pennsylvania has a slightly below average percentage of people with at least a Bachelor's degree. This new email FBI investigation story may not be fatal to Hillary but it should almost certainly tighten up the race yet further with under a fortnight to go https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_educational_attainment
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
With regards to your 10000 vs 100. Yes.
With you regards of polling ratio between the US and UK. No.
No.
Three times No.
The point being, as we have had with LA Times / Black man in Illinois voting Trump saga, is that on a small sample (which most of these polls are), you can get big distortions.
You are saying a 1000 person poll in America is equivalent to a 200 person poll in the UK and this is not true.
The margin override on a 1000 person poll from a population of 350,000,000 is 3.1% the MOE on a 200 person poll of 65,000,000 is 6.93%
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
Lib Dems have been infiltrated by the Social Democrat Party and veered away from liberal principles.
Lib Dems need to return to Gladstone's Liberals.
Gladstonian liberalism consisted of limited government expenditure and low taxation whilst making sure government had balanced budgets and the classical liberal stress on self-help and freedom of choice. Gladstonian liberalism also emphasised free trade, little government intervention in the economy and equality of opportunity through institutional reform.
Gladstonian liberals are 21st century Tories.
Gladstonian liberals are Orange bookers and Osbornian Tories.
Just be looking in detail at ECV. Seems to me that Trump has to win OH, FL, IA, PA and one other state to stop Clinton (assuming NV falls to the independent candidate).
Nobody in the US over the age of 7 is unaware of the clinton email stuff.
Minds are already made up.
Besides what proportion of votes have been cast already? Barring an actual arrest any more on this story is too little, too late.
Of the overall percentage, not huge but will vary by state (and some do not have early voting).
If you are a Trump or a HRC supporter, this will not change minds, simple as. Independents less sure. Perhaps the bigger risk for HRC is that it hampers the operation on getting votes early and / or the "risk" factor of electing HRC has just increased.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
With regards to your 10000 vs 100. Yes.
With you regards of polling ratio between the US and UK. No.
No.
Three times No.
The point being, as we have had with LA Times / Black man in Illinois voting Trump saga, is that on a small sample (which most of these polls are), you can get big distortions.
You are saying a 1000 person poll in America is equivalent to a 200 person poll in the UK and this is not true.
The margin override on a 1000 person poll from a population of 350,000,000 is 3.1% the MOE on a 200 person poll of 65,000,000 is 6.93%
On a related note, the 200 sample Richmond poll also has a MOE close to 7pc. Goldsmith is not a shoo-in, and there's everything to play for.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
The FBI were jung, drawn and quartered over their failings and abuse of procedure.
But the fact that they have reopened it surely will persuade some people that Hillary has changed from a 'Oh she did nothing wrong, the FBI have decided not to act' to a 'Oh she must have done something wrong after all, the FBI are investigating.'
Shall we say that events are not necessarily proceeding to her advantage?
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
Or are people starting to hedge their bets that Trump isn't dead in the water - the media I gather have been far more critical of HRC in the last couple of days. (Rats, ship, you know what I mean).
I take it this is in response to some of the pro-Blair rhetoric that Tim Farron was using to try to peel off soft Labourites? Personally, as an Orange Book Lib Dem, I've been pleasantly surprised by Farron so far. He's positioned the party correctly, in my opinion, with regard to the refugee crisis, Europe and immigration. There's no sign of Miliband-style half arsed economic tinkering. For non-nationalist, pro-market Tory voters I'd have thought that the Lib Dems would be quite appealing at the moment.
With Farron in charge ..... hardly!
What has he actually said or done to provoke that kind of response? It's in Tory areas where the Lib Dems are picking up votes at the moment, so I'm pretty sure that a section of current Conservative supporters feel differently.
I've just been monitoring the level of activity on Betfair's main POTUS market and over a period of 8 minutes I can report that a fairly consistent level of £12k - £15k PER MINUTE has been matched. Talk about Betfair being a licence to print money using other people's money - and it's a true world leader in what it does.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
The terrifying intrusion into politics was not dragging her away in chains in the first place.....
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
A bigger sample is no substitute for a more representative one.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
I'm sure the FBI is well aware of the gravity of this intervention. Whatever it is must be utterly damning for Crooked Hillary.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
I'm sure the FBI is well aware of the gravity of this intervention. Whatever it is must be utterly damning for Crooked Hillary.
It's a very painful election. Life imitating Hollywood. It is not becoming. And I don't think this will affect the result.
Lib Dems have been infiltrated by the Social Democrat Party and veered away from liberal principles.
Lib Dems need to return to Gladstone's Liberals.
Gladstonian liberalism consisted of limited government expenditure and low taxation whilst making sure government had balanced budgets and the classical liberal stress on self-help and freedom of choice. Gladstonian liberalism also emphasised free trade, little government intervention in the economy and equality of opportunity through institutional reform.
Gladstonian liberals are 21st century Tories.
Gladstonian liberals are Orange bookers and Osbornian Tories TSE.
Does anyone still believe Trump can win ? Seriously ?
TGOHF: apart from the polls - which are generally low quality, have small sample sizes (pro-rata them to the UK, you would be looking at sample sizes of 200-300) and where we do not know the methodology - what other information suggests this contest is over?
As I have posted on here, the early voting looks poor for HRC in NC; Brokenwheel has suggested it could be the same in FL; and there are numerous reports of AA voting down sharply in many places, which is a key bedrock, including OH.
Given what has happened over the past 12 months with what has happened vs. what the polls said, you would have to be brave to be guided by the polls.
A 1000 person poll in the US does not equate to a 200 person poll in the UK. That is not how statistics work.
Actually, it does: the sample size is key. A 10000 data set is far more valuable than a 100.
With regards to your 10000 vs 100. Yes.
With you regards of polling ratio between the US and UK. No.
No.
Three times No.
The point being, as we have had with LA Times / Black man in Illinois voting Trump saga, is that on a small sample (which most of these polls are), you can get big distortions.
You are saying a 1000 person poll in America is equivalent to a 200 person poll in the UK and this is not true.
The margin override on a 1000 person poll from a population of 350,000,000 is 3.1% the MOE on a 200 person poll of 65,000,000 is 6.93%
Alastair - apologies, you are right. I messed up Statistics 101
I've just been monitoring the level of activity on Betfair's main POTUS market and over a period of 8 minutes I can report that a fairly consistent level of £12k - £15k PER MINUTE has been matched. Talk about Betfair being a licence to print money using other people's money - and it's a true world leader in what it does.
How does that compare to normal breaking news in fast approaching elections or for that matter live football matches etc?
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
They will have, I think there is enough evidence to say that the people around Clinton did seek to commit perjury by deleting and wiping clean the emails before the FBI could investigate, whether it will get Clinton is not clear, but her "fail to remember" stock answer won't play well. She's lucky that they didn't reopen it before the final debate, Trump would have absolutely destroyed her. If anything that might be when the FBI decided to play politics.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
I'm sure the FBI is well aware of the gravity of this intervention. Whatever it is must be utterly damning for Crooked Hillary.
I haven't been following the email investigation so closely as it seemed like a storm in a teacup.
Looking at the story in the Guardian, Comey says:
“Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant and I cannot predict how long it will take to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.”
So he's not claiming a smoking gun. In God's name then, why ten days before an election? He should have taken emergency holiday leave.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
I'm sure the FBI is well aware of the gravity of this intervention. Whatever it is must be utterly damning for Crooked Hillary.
I haven't been following the email investigation so closely as it seemed like a storm in a teacup.
Looking at the story in the Guardian, Comey says:
“Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant and I cannot predict how long it will take to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.”
So he's not claiming a smoking gun. In God's name then, why ten days before an election? He should have taken emergency holiday leave.
The American people have a right to know the kind of person they are voting for.
Trump won't gain any votes, but Hillary might lose a few.
agreed. She seems to have enough in the can...famous last words
Possibly but the fear for some in the US is that she may be Nixon Mark 2 and that her time in office is clouded by investigations and uncertainty over what will be the end result. That would be a particular concern for older voters who actually remember the Watergate days.
I've just been monitoring the level of activity on Betfair's main POTUS market and over a period of 8 minutes I can report that a fairly consistent level of £12k - £15k PER MINUTE has been matched. Talk about Betfair being a licence to print money using other people's money - and it's a true world leader in what it does.
And they get a small commission on each bet, right?
I've just been monitoring the level of activity on Betfair's main POTUS market and over a period of 8 minutes I can report that a fairly consistent level of £12k - £15k PER MINUTE has been matched. Talk about Betfair being a licence to print money using other people's money - and it's a true world leader in what it does.
And they get a small commission on each bet, right?
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
I'm sure the FBI is well aware of the gravity of this intervention. Whatever it is must be utterly damning for Crooked Hillary.
I haven't been following the email investigation so closely as it seemed like a storm in a teacup.
Looking at the story in the Guardian, Comey says:
“Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant and I cannot predict how long it will take to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.”
So he's not claiming a smoking gun. In God's name then, why ten days before an election? He should have taken emergency holiday leave.
The FBI's reputation is now on the line. They're effectively saying Mrs Clinton is unfit for office.
From 3,500 miles away, this re-opening of the enquiry into Hillary's email activities just 10 days prior to the POTUS elections looks to me like pure unadulterated politics and I'm hardly what you would describe as one of her greatest fans.
Clearly, but what's behind the reopening? Up until now, their critics would say that the FBI have gone out of their way to exonerate Clinton, in a way they wouldn't have done for anyone else. There must have been something come to light that makes all the other stuff look insignificant.
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
The FBI had better have some pretty damning new evidence, or this represents a terrifying intrusion into politics.
I'm sure the FBI is well aware of the gravity of this intervention. Whatever it is must be utterly damning for Crooked Hillary.
I haven't been following the email investigation so closely as it seemed like a storm in a teacup.
On the most generous interpretation, Clinton = Nixon
Comments
(a) that's old data
(b) it's a few thousand votes in meaningless council by elections.
It is 50,000 real votes in a full range of council areas from big cities to rural areas .
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-re-open-investigation-clinton-email-server-n674631
Me, I'll stick with the polls.
The next 11 days may well be a "disaster" for Obama and Clinton's foreign policy image.
In theory Hillary is 3-4 points up and probably wins the EC votes she needs, in practice it could still be anything from a landslide to a Trump win - in the last couple of days it seems to be swinging towards the Republican, but it's most likely too little too late.
With you regards of polling ratio between the US and UK. No.
No.
Three times No.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.107373419
Why don't you treat us all to your fabled analysis of the data then?
Clinton 1.33
Trump 4.35
Sanders 180
Kaine 615
Biden 590
Pence 920
Coming to an inflation statistic near you soon !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-37805525
This is the cumulative early vote scores. The ~7am updates have the full data up to the end of the previous day and after that they are periodically updated, mostly just the mail votes. I've been taking note of the daily changes.
This is the cumulative early vote scores. The ~7am updates have the full data up to the end of the previous day and after that they are periodically updated, mostly just the mail votes. I've been taking note of the daily changes.
Thanks Brokenwheel
"In previous congressional testimony, I referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server. Due to recent developments, I am writing to supplement my previous testimony," Comey wrote.
"In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation," he added.
"Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be signifcant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony,"
1. That the Lib Dems are experiencing a dead cat bounce - the scale of "recovery" that the Conservatives had in the years immediately after 1997, where they were simply clawing back some of the more extreme losses of the immediately preceding years. (Although, that said, the rebuilding of the Tory local government base under Hague was vastly more impressive than the feeble effort that the yellows put in in May. And the Tories didn't ship two thirds of their entire vote in 1997, either.)
2. That people are willing to vote for any old protest party in a local by-election (where nothing, or at most the frequency of bin collections, is perceived to be at stake.) As distinct from a Parliamentary by-election, let alone a General Election.
I will start to believe in the Lib Dem Fightback when there is consistent evidence of a significant recovery in the national VI figures, and not before.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSKCN12S299?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social
This is not unexpected.
Does mess up the media cycle for Clinton a bit.
Nobody in the US over the age of 7 is unaware of the clinton email stuff.
Minds are already made up.
Anyway back from the races and my tip this morning Charbel romped in at 7-2. Got 5-1 on course so time for a glass or two now.
The site seems a mix of the £5-£20 stakers, and the multiple £100 (and up) stakers...
Edit: the lay's now out to 290 even with the back price at 85.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_educational_attainment
The margin override on a 1000 person poll from a population of 350,000,000 is 3.1% the MOE on a 200 person poll of 65,000,000 is 6.93%
Is she about to get arrested, or is Comey about to resign?
"Recent FEC reports showed the campaign spent just $1.8m on polling through September of this year, versus $3.2m on hats."
If you are a Trump or a HRC supporter, this will not change minds, simple as. Independents less sure. Perhaps the bigger risk for HRC is that it hampers the operation on getting votes early and / or the "risk" factor of electing HRC has just increased.
But the fact that they have reopened it surely will persuade some people that Hillary has changed from a 'Oh she did nothing wrong, the FBI have decided not to act' to a 'Oh she must have done something wrong after all, the FBI are investigating.'
Shall we say that events are not necessarily proceeding to her advantage?
http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/CONFIDENTIAL-BMG-POLL-EVENING-STANDARD-Richmond-Park-by-election-data-tables-281016-1.pdf
Leavers: Zac 80%, LD 9% UKIP 7%, Labour 3% Green 1%
Remains: Zac 43%, LD 42%, Labour 13%, Green 2%
Very little sign of significant tactical voting except Lab helping Lib.
The Green vote goes three ways and over 20% of 2015 Lib Dems desert them.
Talk about Betfair being a licence to print money using other people's money - and it's a true world leader in what it does.
Attend more to bias than sample size.
Looking at the story in the Guardian, Comey says:
“Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant and I cannot predict how long it will take to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.”
So he's not claiming a smoking gun. In God's name then, why ten days before an election? He should have taken emergency holiday leave.
Edit: 50/60
Tim Caine (hiding at the bottom of the Betfair screen) at 150 doesn't look like a silly idea if Hillary stands aside.
https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/GBPUSD:CUR
NB: this post may make no sense if viewed more that 30 minutes after posting. That's how fast things can change.