"But in a political sense, there’s certainly some downside for Clinton in the appearance of headlines containing the words “FBI,” “investigation” and “email” just 11 days before the election."
"Certainly some downside"
lol
This is from the man who couldn't bring himself to say she collapsed.
We need polling urgently!!
It's PB.. we always need polling.
I need some urgent reassurance on Clinton as my landslide predictions are looking very sickly after the FBI got involved again.
Trump will probably do something offputting again.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
Labour is still the best fit party for a significant proportion of the electorate (either favoured positively, or as the best of the available options,) there's a significant amount of habit voting, and (possibly) some people think the election is a one-horse race and feel happier and safer going with the herd, and feeling that they have backed the winning side.
It's why I reckon that Corbyn could be run over by a bus and succeeded by the Yorkshire Ripper, and Labour would still manage to poll something close to a quarter of the popular vote in a general election. They can be displaced, but if it happens it'll likely be a lengthy and attritional process.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
I've said it before... I'm sure HM is ready to appoint an interim governor at a moments notice.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
Some people vote for a party because they always have done and their fathers and grandfathers before them. I also suspect that there are many vested interests against having change - in low turnout elections these are a large proportion of the vote.
Yes all of that. But we should hold accountable those who's job is to deal with certain matters. The rival parties in those localities need to do a better job and so should the local media.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
"But in a political sense, there’s certainly some downside for Clinton in the appearance of headlines containing the words “FBI,” “investigation” and “email” just 11 days before the election."
"Certainly some downside"
lol
This is from the man who couldn't bring himself to say she collapsed.
We need polling urgently!!
There was a boost in the LA Times - but that is weekly so any changes are damped down (and probably just shows that the AA on their panel changed sides again).
I don't pay any attention to LA Times poll. Either it is rubbish, which some PBers have pointed out for technical reasons, or they are right and everyone else is wrong and I will lose some money.
But remember - the Trend is your Friend. Nate reduces absolute values by 5% in favour of Clinton, so the 2.4 lead it shows for Trump is converted into a 3% (after rounding) for Clinton. The more important fact is that Trump's lead (which at one time was 6.7% and then dropped to -1.3) is now recovered by 3.7%.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
- Normally find this stuff terribly dull, but can’t remember a more entertaining campaign.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
.....It's why I reckon that Corbyn could be run over by a bus and succeeded by the Yorkshire Ripper, and Labour would still manage to poll something close to a quarter of the popular vote in a general election. They can be displaced, but if it happens it'll likely be a lengthy and attritional process.
Under present circumstances, I would put the Labour bottom at 20% and that they are realistically at 25% now. If a viable centre or centre left alternative, develops then they will drop below 20%.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
I've said it before... I'm sure HM is ready to appoint an interim governor at a moments notice.
Well we've rolled back the years by getting out the EU so no reason USA can't roll back the Centuries and rejoin the Empire/Commonwealth!
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
The truth is four months into a May premiership and there is NOTHING to commend her leadership
That's not a fact, that's an opinion.
And for it to be a valid one, you need to be able to suggest some things that she could have done differently that you would have been happier with...
Given she has done nothing so far how is it possible.
Not sure why we're having that by election in Richmond Park then.
True she did an 180 degree turn on Heathrow , knowing well it will be in the long grass for at least 10 years and can be dumped along the line.
Not a 180 degree turn - it's been obvious for years that if there were to be a decision, it would be Heathrow. At most she's taken the handbrake off and the car has started to roll. There's still time for an emergency stop, sadly.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
Tribalism.
As I've said before, I don't think that anyone who votes for a party because they always have and their parents always have and their grandparents always did really deserves the vote. On a national scale, it doesn't much matter because there are roughly equal numbers on both sides and they cancel each other out. But on a local scale it does cause problems.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
- Normally find this stuff terribly dull, but can’t remember a more entertaining campaign.
I am sure Hollywood is considering making a film out of it - they just need the final denouemont to decide whether it is one woman's triumph over adversity or a gallant attack on wealth and privilege that fails.
Hillary needs to be careful about commenting on the FBI. Trump can get away with it to some extent but she is regarded as the Establishment. From her, it could easily look like bullying. "Don't you know who I am."
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
Local government is elected by the same unjust FPTP system as national government. The result can be 95% or 100% of the seats on 40% or 50% of the vote. A.k.a. a recipe for a corrupt one-party state.
Also WTF should voters expect their actions to change matters if local government is run by directives from Whitehall and has been since the early post-War years? Unlike most of rest of Europe.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
If that is wide spread it will at least reduce the chances of Labour people being elected and provides opportunities for other parties to get elected and over turn this corrupt monopoly.
The truth is four months into a May premiership and there is NOTHING to commend her leadership
That's not a fact, that's an opinion.
And for it to be a valid one, you need to be able to suggest some things that she could have done differently that you would have been happier with...
Given she has done nothing so far how is it possible.
Not sure why we're having that by election in Richmond Park then.
True she did an 180 degree turn on Heathrow , knowing well it will be in the long grass for at least 10 years and can be dumped along the line.
Not a 180 degree turn - it's been obvious for years that if there were to be a decision, it would be Heathrow. At most she's taken the handbrake off and the car has started to roll. There's still time for an emergency stop, sadly.
It was not that long ago she was bloigging about how bad it would be and what a great decision Cameron made banning it. What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London. Their obsession with channelling all the money , infrastructure into London has wrecked the country. They are welcome to be the pollution and laundering capital of the world.
Is it one of those south-east towns where the affluent live in surrounding villages while the town itself is much less so ?
Haven't been there for yonks but it used to be quite nice, at least the bits near the river were. In Victorian times Maidenhead was adultery central for the upper classes. It had the river, nice hotels with very discreet staff and was generally the place to take someone else's wife. Such was its reputation it even gets a mention as such by Jerome in "Three men in a boat" and the one of the murders in "Kind Hearts and Coronets" was based around a place very like Maidenhead and an adulterous aristocrat.
"But in a political sense, there’s certainly some downside for Clinton in the appearance of headlines containing the words “FBI,” “investigation” and “email” just 11 days before the election."
"Certainly some downside"
lol
This is from the man who couldn't bring himself to say she collapsed.
We need polling urgently!!
There was a boost in the LA Times - but that is weekly so any changes are damped down (and probably just shows that the AA on their panel changed sides again).
I don't pay any attention to LA Times poll. Either it is rubbish, which some PBers have pointed out for technical reasons, or they are right and everyone else is wrong and I will lose some money.
When reweighed it follows he RCP trend almost exactly so it is good to follow for the trend. As long as you pay attention to why it thanks massive jumps have happened.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
If that is wide spread it will at least reduce the chances of Labour people being elected and provides opportunities for other parties to get elected and over turn this corrupt monopoly.
You think most voters know (or care) where on the party spectrum their local council candidates lie? I have no idea if my Tory county councilor is a Leaver or Remainer, nor can I be bothered to try and find out.
F1: this won't count towards the weekend tally unless I add it to the pre-qualifying piece, but I've had an early bet on Vettel at 12, each way, for pole.
Pole's unlikely but he's a distance ahead of his team mate and, so far, Rosberg too. Just under 3/1 or so for him to be top 2 feels too long to me.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
I live in probably the most liberal part of the US. Would love to see Trump elected just for the sheer exasperation
Also WTF should voters expect their actions to change matters if local government is run by directives from Whitehall and has been since the early post-War years? Unlike most of rest of Europe.
To be fair, this has become an obstacle for any Government intent on devolving power. If a bad local administration is elected then too many voters are inclined to continue to blame the consequences on Westminster - either because they expect to be rescued, or because the hopeless local administration blames its failure to deliver on financial or regulatory problems created at the centre (regardless of whether or not this is actually true.)
Suppose you have party A in Government, and party B wins a powerful devolved mayoralty with its own health budget. If the hospitals controlled by the mayor go down the toilet, who gets the blame from the voters - party A, party B, or both? Answers on a postcard...
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Ugh ..... that's really creepy and she doesn't even look 13. To think that a few months ago he was being considered as the Democratic nominee should Hillary be forced to step aside.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
If that is wide spread it will at least reduce the chances of Labour people being elected and provides opportunities for other parties to get elected and over turn this corrupt monopoly.
You think most voters know (or care) where on the party spectrum their local council candidates lie? I have no idea if my Tory county councilor is a Leaver or Remainer, nor can I be bothered to try and find out.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
If that is wide spread it will at least reduce the chances of Labour people being elected and provides opportunities for other parties to get elected and over turn this corrupt monopoly.
You think most voters know (or care) where on the party spectrum their local council candidates lie? I have no idea if my Tory county councilor is a Leaver or Remainer, nor can I be bothered to try and find out.
I am not referring to REMAIN or LEAVE.
Yes I know - I was just using that by way of illustration.
But 'things are different now' and 'the government is taking action behind the scenes' etc etc etc. The list of government inaction was long, I had questions which went: When is Home Secretary Theresa May going to take ....etc etc Govt failing etc etc
This is where local politicians need to be held accountable first.
1. Labour's Rotherham Council are at fault. 2. Labour's latest Police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire Police needs to act.
And when they don't ? And when the IPCC, Ofsted and all 'three monkeys' alphabet soup regulators don't ? Rotherham was exposed not by the authorities - who all claimed nothing was wrong - but by outsiders. The only government minister who took any action was Eric Pickles. He commissioned a report into Rotherham Council (notice that no equivalent has been made into the South Yorkshire Police) which quickly exposed that it was in 'complete denial' and 'not fit for purpose': http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31130750 Yet year after year Ofsted reported no problems. When Keith Vaz is one of the few people who have acted with integrity on an issue you know that there is something fundamentally wrong.
Why do the voters keep electing useless Labour people on the councils and for the Police commissioner? It is also the voters that are tolerating the abuses by re-electing the same party.
The conclusion is that many voters don't care, unfortunately.
That is democracy. But it is also why the national government needs to make it clear to local voters where the buck stops and encourage them to change matters.
Don't worry. A lot of the Labour local council representatives across the country may soon be swept aside and replaced by candidates whose only qualification is the phrase "I support Jeremy Corbyn" in their election statement. I hope that provides some reassurance.
If that is wide spread it will at least reduce the chances of Labour people being elected and provides opportunities for other parties to get elected and over turn this corrupt monopoly.
Any one-party state provides opportunity for a corrupt monopoly. That’s Right or Left, or come to that Centre.
Ugh ..... that's really creepy and she doesn't even look 13. To think that a few months ago he was being considered as the Democratic nominee should Hillary be forced to step aside.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Legacy airlines do. Low cost carriers work on point to point.
Also, plenty of overseas airlines are more than happy to serve Manchester - both short haul and long haul - with more routes being lined up. Emirates can fill three A380s a day*, plus all of their flights from other UK regional airports.
*Third flight will be permanently 'up-gauged' in the new year.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Legacy airlines do. Low cost carriers work on point to point.
Also, plenty of overseas airlines are more than happy to serve Manchester - both short haul and long haul - with more routes being lined up. Emirates can fill three A380s a day*, plus all of their flights from other UK regional airports.
*Third flight will be permanently 'up-gauged' in the new year.
Yeah, you have plenty more options if you want to travel to a hub.
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit.
Harsh Malcolm. Three bob bits are at least made of the right metal and have some intrinsic value.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Exactly. And the airlines haven't shown any signs of wanting a UK hub anywhere except London (just looking at the destination lists for the various regional airlines demonstrates this).
With the delays through the coalition, Brown's government and Blair's government, for much of the country the "UK hub" has by default become Amsterdam, as various PBers have noted from their personal experiences.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
I live in probably the most liberal part of the US. Would love to see Trump elected just for the sheer exasperation
You still in California Rob, if so anywhere near Santa Clara. I lived there for a while in late eighties. Must go back sometime to see how it has changed. Was a great area to live in those days at least.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
Europe is about the face the Hofer, Wilders, Le Pen, Afd onslaught once the U.S. election is over
F1: this won't count towards the weekend tally unless I add it to the pre-qualifying piece, but I've had an early bet on Vettel at 12, each way, for pole.
Pole's unlikely but he's a distance ahead of his team mate and, so far, Rosberg too. Just under 3/1 or so for him to be top 2 feels too long to me.
Morris - that looks like an OK kind of bet, although I dislike the concept of effectively wasting half my stake on the win element. Personally I prefer to bet against someone doing something very difficult, rather than betting on him doing it. In this instance, I'm laying Rosberg not to finish top three at odds of 1.33. I don't see him beating Hamilton and there are 3 or 4 other good drivers challenging for a podium in a situation where he'll be satisfied with a decent points finish. Plus, in the overall scheme of things, compared with his team mate for instance, he's due a fair dose of bad luck.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
I live in probably the most liberal part of the US. Would love to see Trump elected just for the sheer exasperation
You still in California Rob, if so anywhere near Santa Clara. I lived there for a while in late eighties. Must go back sometime to see how it has changed. Was a great area to live in those days at least.
Am in the Bay Area, so I think that is quite a ways away!
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Lifetime achievements
Clinton Getting married to someone talented
Trump Being born into a rich family
Clinton was a better lawyer than her husband and got better grades at law school, even if he was a better politician, Trump's father was a millionaire, he became a billionaire
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
I live in probably the most liberal part of the US. Would love to see Trump elected just for the sheer exasperation
You still in California Rob, if so anywhere near Santa Clara. I lived there for a while in late eighties. Must go back sometime to see how it has changed. Was a great area to live in those days at least.
Am in the Bay Area, so I think that is quite a ways away!
Santa Clara is in the Bay Area, in the South Bay. It's where the Niners now play...
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
I live in probably the most liberal part of the US. Would love to see Trump elected just for the sheer exasperation
You still in California Rob, if so anywhere near Santa Clara. I lived there for a while in late eighties. Must go back sometime to see how it has changed. Was a great area to live in those days at least.
Am in the Bay Area, so I think that is quite a ways away!
Santa Clara is in the Bay Area, in the South Bay. It's where the Niners now play...
Shows how much I know! I'm on the East Bay! Much nicer down there though.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Legacy airlines do. Low cost carriers work on point to point.
Also, plenty of overseas airlines are more than happy to serve Manchester - both short haul and long haul - with more routes being lined up. Emirates can fill three A380s a day*, plus all of their flights from other UK regional airports.
*Third flight will be permanently 'up-gauged' in the new year.
Yeah, you have plenty more options if you want to travel to a hub.
Emirates offers Manchester to Australia with one stop. BA can only offer it with 2 stops. Clearly not a market they much care about.
And the low-costs don't have hubs - they just fly from multiple bases to even more other places on a point to point basis. BA gave up on direct flights from the UK regions to anywhere other than London years ago. If you need to go via a european hub to get to a short haul (or long haul) destination, BA have no differentiation over Air France-KLM or Lufthansa.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Legacy airlines do. Low cost carriers work on point to point.
Also, plenty of overseas airlines are more than happy to serve Manchester - both short haul and long haul - with more routes being lined up. Emirates can fill three A380s a day*, plus all of their flights from other UK regional airports.
*Third flight will be permanently 'up-gauged' in the new year.
Yeah, you have plenty more options if you want to travel to a hub.
Emirates offers Manchester to Australia with one stop. BA can only offer it with 2 stops. Clearly not a market they much care about.
And the low-costs don't have hubs - they just fly from multiple bases to even more other places on a point to point basis. BA gave up on direct flights from the UK regions to anywhere other than London years ago. If you need to go via a european hub to get to a short haul (or long haul) destination, BA have no differentiation over Air France-KLM or Lufthansa.
Probably because Emirates are sucking up all the business on that particular route. Fair point about low cost carriers though.
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
Morning GIN.
Morning Malc! What do you make of this years POTUS election?
Both have been taking lessons from Tories I think. It is as crooked as a 3 bob bit. I am hoping "The Donald" triumphs but it shows how poor the supposed free world has fallen. Only thing that can save us us is Europe but it looks like we are chained to US and they are determined to become as mediocre and crooked as the UK.
I live in probably the most liberal part of the US. Would love to see Trump elected just for the sheer exasperation
You still in California Rob, if so anywhere near Santa Clara. I lived there for a while in late eighties. Must go back sometime to see how it has changed. Was a great area to live in those days at least.
Am in the Bay Area, so I think that is quite a ways away!
Rob , about 40 miles or so I reckon, we went into San Francisco often and was not a long journey. Used to love going to Half Moon Bay as well. So many places to go from there, Lake Tahoe , Yosemite , and right down coast to San Diego.
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
Regated Image surfaces of Huma Abedin crying on plane as Clinton Campaign finds out the FBI has re-opened the email investigation. #HillarysEmails https://t.co/2yIUgiYOsV
So POTUS will either be a seedy, tax avoiding, fantasist and serial groper. Or someone who is thoroughly corrupt and might well finish their Presidential terms behind bars?
And we think we've got problems.
I've said it before... I'm sure HM is ready to appoint an interim governor at a moments notice.
Mr. Putney, hmm. Maybe. I think it likely the podium places will be a Mercedes/Ferrari affair, and Ferrari have a history of cocking things up, and Hamilton has worse reliability than Rosberg.
There's an off-chance Vettel could get the pole, but I'd prefer a top 2 bet.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Legacy airlines do. Low cost carriers work on point to point.
Also, plenty of overseas airlines are more than happy to serve Manchester - both short haul and long haul - with more routes being lined up. Emirates can fill three A380s a day*, plus all of their flights from other UK regional airports.
*Third flight will be permanently 'up-gauged' in the new year.
Yeah, you have plenty more options if you want to travel to a hub.
Emirates offers Manchester to Australia with one stop. BA can only offer it with 2 stops. Clearly not a market they much care about.
And the low-costs don't have hubs - they just fly from multiple bases to even more other places on a point to point basis. BA gave up on direct flights from the UK regions to anywhere other than London years ago. If you need to go via a european hub to get to a short haul (or long haul) destination, BA have no differentiation over Air France-KLM or Lufthansa.
Probably because Emirates are sucking up all the business on that particular route. Fair point about low cost carriers though.
Emirates also cover Birmingham.
If flying via a hub rather than point to point, it matters little where that hub is situated, as long as it is efficient. I rather like KLM via Schipol, 4 flights a day from Birmingham.
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
There was a guest on CNN speculating about Wiener doing a plea bargain/immunity from prosecution because he could be facing a 10 to 15 year stretch for allegedly sexting the 15 year old. The CNN host, Don Lemon seemed pissed off that anyone should suggest such a thing.
I'm really wondering if his wife is going under the bus despite being Hillary's best buddy. Weiner doesn't have much to lose now since they're estranged.
Megyn Kelly was a wonder to watch last night - she's incandescent, I could almost feel her thinking 'well that's my $70k donation wasted'
"But in a political sense, there’s certainly some downside for Clinton in the appearance of headlines containing the words “FBI,” “investigation” and “email” just 11 days before the election."
"Certainly some downside"
lol
This is from the man who couldn't bring himself to say she collapsed.
We need polling urgently!!
It's PB.. we always need polling.
I need some urgent reassurance on Clinton as my landslide predictions are looking very sickly after the FBI got involved again.
Wait until results of early voting are released and analysed after this weekend- a crucial time for Dems now in swing states.
I can't find the tweet - but someone on Reddit has noticed Obama isn't attending some Hillary events now...
Plato, did you not receive the PB memo that Clinton is nailed on for POTUS?
This FBI bomb has amused me greatly. Where is 619?
Still awaiting instructions, or maybe the trolls get the day off on Saturday?
TBH, the online #HillBullies are most amusing - there's a few hundred of them and so obvious. After Scott Adams called them out along with a few other big names - they evaporated, and hiliariously Hillary then launched a policy to spend $500m on anti-bullying.
"I’ve been trying to figure out what common trait binds Clinton supporters together. As far as I can tell, the most unifying characteristic is a willingness to bully in all its forms.
If you have a Trump sign in your lawn, they will steal it.
If you have a Trump bumper sticker, they will deface your car.
if you speak of Trump at work you could get fired.
On social media, almost every message I get from a Clinton supporter is a bullying type of message. They insult. They try to shame. They label. And obviously they threaten my livelihood.
We know from Project Veritas that Clinton supporters tried to incite violence at Trump rallies. The media downplays it.
We also know Clinton’s side hired paid trolls to bully online. You don’t hear much about that.
Yesterday, by no coincidence, Huffington Post, Salon, and Daily Kos all published similar-sounding hit pieces on me, presumably to lower my influence. (That reason, plus jealousy, are the only reasons writers write about other writers.)
That before the latest emailgate revelations. Trump has a 16% lead amongst whites, closing in on Romney's 20% lead in 2012, while Hillary leads by 51% amongst non whites, down on Obama's 61% lead
Regated Image surfaces of Huma Abedin crying on plane as Clinton Campaign finds out the FBI has re-opened the email investigation. #HillarysEmails https://t.co/2yIUgiYOsV
How does that square with the story that they didn't find out about it until after the plane landed?
Is it one of those south-east towns where the affluent live in surrounding villages while the town itself is much less so ?
I live near Maidenhead but rarely go there. The town centre is utterly soulless; I get the impression the whole lot was ripped up around 1987 and 'redeveloped'.
Regated Image surfaces of Huma Abedin crying on plane as Clinton Campaign finds out the FBI has re-opened the email investigation. #HillarysEmails https://t.co/2yIUgiYOsV
How does that square with the story that they didn't find out about it until after the plane landed?
I think they had a brief bit of wifi during the flight.
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
That’d cause a Trumplosion!
Yes it would be 2000 on steroids
Can we have the end of Veep come true? A tie in the electoral college. THAT way neither of them becomes President and Congress can elect someone who isn't repulsive.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Exactly. And the airlines haven't shown any signs of wanting a UK hub anywhere except London (just looking at the destination lists for the various regional airlines demonstrates this).
With the delays through the coalition, Brown's government and Blair's government, for much of the country the "UK hub" has by default become Amsterdam, as various PBers have noted from their personal experiences.
An international transit passenger spends next to bugger all in the UK, maybe the price of a cup of coffee. It is true that someone has to be employed to shift their bags between aeroplanes and that by operating as a hub there maybe more destinations available from the airport than otherwise would be the case, that is to say more flights and more landing fees. However does that justify the full costs of expanding Heathrow?
Why not let Schipol become the hub? It is becoming the de facto hub now and by the time Heathrow 3 has been built will have embedded itself in that position. Does it make sense at this point in time to try and compete, especially when there will be no return on investment just added costs (the the airlines, the exchequer and to the wider economy) for decades to come.
Regated Image surfaces of Huma Abedin crying on plane as Clinton Campaign finds out the FBI has re-opened the email investigation. #HillarysEmails https://t.co/2yIUgiYOsV
How does that square with the story that they didn't find out about it until after the plane landed?
Good point. No doubt Ms Abedin is just a tad upset having discovered her boss is a criminal and her husband a peado?
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
That’d cause a Trumplosion!
Yes it would be 2000 on steroids
Can we have the end of Veep come true? A tie in the electoral college. THAT way neither of them becomes President and Congress can elect someone who isn't repulsive.
If Trump won Nevada and New Hampshire but Hillary won Pennsylvania yes
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
That’d cause a Trumplosion!
Yes it would be 2000 on steroids
Can we have the end of Veep come true? A tie in the electoral college. THAT way neither of them becomes President and Congress can elect someone who isn't repulsive.
The House can only pick from the top 3 ECV-getters. So a 269-269 tie, they'd have to pick one or other. If there's no majority and McMullin has won Utah, they could pick him, but nobody else.
Regated Image surfaces of Huma Abedin crying on plane as Clinton Campaign finds out the FBI has re-opened the email investigation. #HillarysEmails https://t.co/2yIUgiYOsV
How does that square with the story that they didn't find out about it until after the plane landed?
I think they had a brief bit of wifi during the flight.
The most delicious thing about it is that Annie Leibovitz was on the plane doing a photoshoot with Hillary.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Exactly. And the airlines haven't shown any signs of wanting a UK hub anywhere except London (just looking at the destination lists for the various regional airlines demonstrates this).
With the delays through the coalition, Brown's government and Blair's government, for much of the country the "UK hub" has by default become Amsterdam, as various PBers have noted from their personal experiences.
An international transit passenger spends next to bugger all in the UK, maybe the price of a cup of coffee. It is true that someone has to be employed to shift their bags between aeroplanes and that by operating as a hub there maybe more destinations available from the airport than otherwise would be the case, that is to say more flights and more landing fees. However does that justify the full costs of expanding Heathrow?
Why not let Schipol become the hub? It is becoming the de facto hub now and by the time Heathrow 3 has been built will have embedded itself in that position. Does it make sense at this point in time to try and compete, especially when there will be no return on investment just added costs (the the airlines, the exchequer and to the wider economy) for decades to come.
Heathrow is only a hub for BA - and they already have more slots than they know what to do with. For just about every other airline it is a spoke - they predominantly fly passengers for whom LHR is their final destination. They could just as easily drop them in another London airport, but credit to LHR's marketing department, the world appears to think that LHR is the only classy option if flying to London.
Expansion of Gatwick, with free allocation of all of the extra slots, would allow new airlines to serve London with minimal start-up cost and could even facilitate the establishment of a mini-hub for Star or Skyteam.
The rest of the UK will carry on routing via Amsterdam, Paris and the Middle East however many runways get built at LHR.
Is it one of those south-east towns where the affluent live in surrounding villages while the town itself is much less so ?
I live near Maidenhead but rarely go there. The town centre is utterly soulless; I get the impression the whole lot was ripped up around 1987 and 'redeveloped'.
Um, I visited the train station back in 2011, when I did the Marlow Branch. Interesting statues on the main platforms.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Exactly. And the airlines haven't shown any signs of wanting a UK hub anywhere except London (just looking at the destination lists for the various regional airlines demonstrates this).
With the delays through the coalition, Brown's government and Blair's government, for much of the country the "UK hub" has by default become Amsterdam, as various PBers have noted from their personal experiences.
An international transit passenger spends next to bugger all in the UK, maybe the price of a cup of coffee. It is true that someone has to be employed to shift their bags between aeroplanes and that by operating as a hub there maybe more destinations available from the airport than otherwise would be the case, that is to say more flights and more landing fees. However does that justify the full costs of expanding Heathrow?
Why not let Schipol become the hub? It is becoming the de facto hub now and by the time Heathrow 3 has been built will have embedded itself in that position. Does it make sense at this point in time to try and compete, especially when there will be no return on investment just added costs (the the airlines, the exchequer and to the wider economy) for decades to come.
Surely the business we get from this is not the cup of coffee but the fact that planes are landing here, taking off here, being supplied and maintained here and the staff are based here. There is a lot of business and jobs attracted to hub airports and we have been losing out.
That before the latest emailgate revelations. Trump has a 16% lead amongst whites, closing in on Romney's 20% lead in 2012, while Hillary leads by 51% amongst non whites, down on Obama's 61% lead
I think the assumption that every Democrat is voting for Hillary is bizarre. There's Stein and Johnson as Bernie surrogates and straight swaps to Trump.
Ditto the AA vote, I'm very sceptical about it all. Hence viewing polling as pretty meh. The samples are terrible too.
What they should be doing is expanding regional airports and having direct travel from somewhere other than London.
That's a good idea, in theory. Provided that the airlines want it, of course.
Airlines love hub and spoke
Exactly. And the airlines haven't shown any signs of wanting a UK hub anywhere except London (just looking at the destination lists for the various regional airlines demonstrates this).
With the delays through the coalition, Brown's government and Blair's government, for much of the country the "UK hub" has by default become Amsterdam, as various PBers have noted from their personal experiences.
No matter what they do with Heathrow I would still rather use Schipol as my hub It is a million times better arranged as an airport and miles easier to get to than Heathrow for anyone south of Newcastle on the east side of the country. Heathrow was a deeply stupid choice and we should have seen far greater expansion of one of the Midlands or North West airports.
This was written by Martin Kettle in Guardian before the email story broke yesterday:
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
I doubt however if at this stage it is enough to stop her being elected given the insane pileup that is Donald Trump's campaign, although world popcorn prices will spike if she is arrested partway through her victory speech.
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
It could be enough for Trump to win the popular vote, maybe not the Electoral College
That’d cause a Trumplosion!
Yes it would be 2000 on steroids
Can we have the end of Veep come true? A tie in the electoral college. THAT way neither of them becomes President and Congress can elect someone who isn't repulsive.
Do you know much about Kaine? I've no idea. Pence is an excellent VP pick and core GOP.
Comments
Reassured ?
And we think we've got problems.
It's why I reckon that Corbyn could be run over by a bus and succeeded by the Yorkshire Ripper, and Labour would still manage to poll something close to a quarter of the popular vote in a general election. They can be displaced, but if it happens it'll likely be a lengthy and attritional process.
Clinton
Getting married to someone talented
Trump
Being born into a rich family
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/29/exeter-fire-still-burning-as-ruptured-gas-main-fuels-flames
Still burning after 24 hours due to a gas main.
http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/13CD9/production/_92131118_priscilla_pa.jpg
[Src.: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37802306]
Are we doing more harm than good?
As I've said before, I don't think that anyone who votes for a party because they always have and their parents always have and their grandparents always did really deserves the vote. On a national scale, it doesn't much matter because there are roughly equal numbers on both sides and they cancel each other out. But on a local scale it does cause problems.
Also WTF should voters expect their actions to change matters if local government is run by directives from Whitehall and has been since the early post-War years? Unlike most of rest of Europe.
Betting PostF1: this won't count towards the weekend tally unless I add it to the pre-qualifying piece, but I've had an early bet on Vettel at 12, each way, for pole.
Pole's unlikely but he's a distance ahead of his team mate and, so far, Rosberg too. Just under 3/1 or so for him to be top 2 feels too long to me.
Suppose you have party A in Government, and party B wins a powerful devolved mayoralty with its own health budget. If the hospitals controlled by the mayor go down the toilet, who gets the blame from the voters - party A, party B, or both? Answers on a postcard...
"The Republican pollster Frank Luntz – whom Trump described on Twitter as “a total clown … a low-class slob” – said that if the campaign this autumn were about Trump, then Clinton would win; if it were about Clinton, then Trump could pull it off. Overwhelmingly, the campaign has proved to be about Trump. But that’s now about to change."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/27/hillary-clinton-will-win-what-kind-of-president-white-house-obama
Looks like the election just became about Clinton.
Of course they should be rescued from France. For humanitarian reasons... can't imagine a worse fate
Also, plenty of overseas airlines are more than happy to serve Manchester - both short haul and long haul - with more routes being lined up. Emirates can fill three A380s a day*, plus all of their flights from other UK regional airports.
*Third flight will be permanently 'up-gauged' in the new year.
This whole campaign knocks it into a cocked hat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w918Eh3fij0
What it could very easily do is boost the Republicans downticket, as the soft Hilary vote hedge their bets and/or gear up for impeachment if they're really suspicious. I think we should now dismiss thoughts of Democrats retaking the House, for instance.
Trump and Clinton on the other hand...
With the delays through the coalition, Brown's government and Blair's government, for much of the country the "UK hub" has by default become Amsterdam, as various PBers have noted from their personal experiences.
Giuliani helpfully listed all the laws he thinks she broke on Hannity - even discounting his partisanship - it's quite a list.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVPpmGNtJws
Personally I prefer to bet against someone doing something very difficult, rather than betting on him doing it. In this instance, I'm laying Rosberg not to finish top three at odds of 1.33. I don't see him beating Hamilton and there are 3 or 4 other good drivers challenging for a podium in a situation where he'll be satisfied with a decent points finish. Plus, in the overall scheme of things, compared with his team mate for instance, he's due a fair dose of bad luck.
And the low-costs don't have hubs - they just fly from multiple bases to even more other places on a point to point basis. BA gave up on direct flights from the UK regions to anywhere other than London years ago. If you need to go via a european hub to get to a short haul (or long haul) destination, BA have no differentiation over Air France-KLM or Lufthansa.
Clinton 47 – Trump 45 in new Post-ABC Tracking poll https://t.co/BDzdbF3x6P https://t.co/VVwDNYjuAY
Image surfaces of Huma Abedin crying on plane as Clinton Campaign finds out the FBI has re-opened the email investigation. #HillarysEmails https://t.co/2yIUgiYOsV
There's an off-chance Vettel could get the pole, but I'd prefer a top 2 bet.
If flying via a hub rather than point to point, it matters little where that hub is situated, as long as it is efficient. I rather like KLM via Schipol, 4 flights a day from Birmingham.
http://reaction.life/jill-stein-green-party-candidate-money-big-carbon/
His blog on this is most entertaining. http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152117093416/how-to-insult-me-on-twitter
and
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152293480726/the-bully-party
"I’ve been trying to figure out what common trait binds Clinton supporters together. As far as I can tell, the most unifying characteristic is a willingness to bully in all its forms.
If you have a Trump sign in your lawn, they will steal it.
If you have a Trump bumper sticker, they will deface your car.
if you speak of Trump at work you could get fired.
On social media, almost every message I get from a Clinton supporter is a bullying type of message. They insult. They try to shame. They label. And obviously they threaten my livelihood.
We know from Project Veritas that Clinton supporters tried to incite violence at Trump rallies. The media downplays it.
We also know Clinton’s side hired paid trolls to bully online. You don’t hear much about that.
Yesterday, by no coincidence, Huffington Post, Salon, and Daily Kos all published similar-sounding hit pieces on me, presumably to lower my influence. (That reason, plus jealousy, are the only reasons writers write about other writers.)
Read More »
Here's a list of States that will allow early voters to change their early vote following the reopening of the FBI probe.
#HillarysEmails https://t.co/ggPZDmgBNw
Why not let Schipol become the hub? It is becoming the de facto hub now and by the time Heathrow 3 has been built will have embedded itself in that position. Does it make sense at this point in time to try and compete, especially when there will be no return on investment just added costs (the the airlines, the exchequer and to the wider economy) for decades to come.
FBI Reopens Clinton Probe
Hannity:Giuliani listed 16Fed.Laws violated by H.Clinton https://t.co/acersy6znx
Expansion of Gatwick, with free allocation of all of the extra slots, would allow new airlines to serve London with minimal start-up cost and could even facilitate the establishment of a mini-hub for Star or Skyteam.
The rest of the UK will carry on routing via Amsterdam, Paris and the Middle East however many runways get built at LHR.
Ditto the AA vote, I'm very sceptical about it all. Hence viewing polling as pretty meh. The samples are terrible too.
It is a million times better arranged as an airport and miles easier to get to than Heathrow for anyone south of Newcastle on the east side of the country. Heathrow was a deeply stupid choice and we should have seen far greater expansion of one of the Midlands or North West airports.
Huma hubby throws Hillary Clinton campaign into 'danger zone'