'The Orgreave decision represents a great victory for the Arbeit Macht Frei wing of the Tory party! Herman Goering would have been so proud of Amber Rudd, and been confident that she would have found good reasons not to launch an enquiry into the opening of concentration camps in 1933.'
So the New Labour government was even worse as they had 13 years to investigate Orgreave,but also realized it would be a complete waste of time and taxpayers money.
Re Orgreave, when you're lobbing rocks at people trying to get to work, don't be surprised when you end up on the receiving end of a police officer's boot or truncheon.
As for these events being too distant in time, I believe that the police are currently engaged in investigating allegations made against a former Bishop of Chichester relating to events of the early 1950s. The Bishop concerned died in 1958!
Why are the police investigating a dead person?
That did occur to me simply because he cannot be charged or prosecuted. However, a man has made allegations of abuse relating to the early 1950s.
But if the suspect is dead, what are the police hoping to achieve?
Nothing - other than to look as if they are doing something. It's the same nonsense we had when the police put an officer outside Edward Heath's home over similar allegations. Mind you, given the nonsense which is going on with the judicial inquiry into historic child abuse (which is a FUBAR on stilts) there's not much hope of anything sensible emerging when an investigation is confused with therapy for victims. The two are not the same.
It's pointless and cruel sentimentality to confuse the two.
Investigations should be focused, should be led by tough, trained investigators who know what they are doing, written in clear language and should aim to be quick. You can get 80-90% of what you need to know pretty quickly IMO. Sometimes spending 90% of your time on gathering 10% of the information is pointless.
When the approach is, we know that they're guilty, now where's the evidence, one runs the same risks as we saw repeatedly from Police behaviour in the 1960s and 1970s.
I'm no criminal lawyer but claimants are referred to as victims there is a presumption of guilt and honesty which, without evidence, I'm extremely uncomfortable with.
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
As for these events being too distant in time, I believe that the police are currently engaged in investigating allegations made against a former Bishop of Chichester relating to events of the early 1950s. The Bishop concerned died in 1958!
Why are the police investigating a dead person?
Presumably because the C of E might be corporately (?) liable and because potential victims are still alive.
But if so, there's a considerable difference between an innocent child or, possibly, young adult, and a striker, engaged in an illegal strike, attending an illegal picket and intend on intimidating police and company. While that is of itself no excuse for illegal behaviour on the part of the police, it does raise the bar in terms of where compensation might be due.
There is no corporate liability for the criminal offence of child abuse. Civil liability is another matter. But that is not a police matter.
Fair enough. Do you have any suggestions for why the police might be investigating someone dead for more than half a century?
I have a number of cynical views on why they might do so.
What the police themselves have said would be a good start.
IMO we are so obsessed with uncovering alleged crimes by dead people - with the concomitant grandstanding and posturing - that we are at risk of not properly investigating crimes being committed now. Far easier to get outraged by what long since dead people are alleged to have done than to take effective steps to protect children now and catch, investigate and prosecute their abusers (and those who protect them) now.
The latter involves hard work. The former involves a lot of emoting and air time in the media.
Has parliament had the debate where everyone in England and Wales wants an extra hour of light in the evening, but Scottish farmers can't send their kids to school in the light or some such ?
Always an annual event that inevitably never goes anywhere.
As for these events being too distant in time, I believe that the police are currently engaged in investigating allegations made against a former Bishop of Chichester relating to events of the early 1950s. The Bishop concerned died in 1958!
Why are the police investigating a dead person?
That did occur to me simply because he cannot be charged or prosecuted. However, a man has made allegations of abuse relating to the early 1950s.
But if the suspect is dead, what are the police hoping to achieve?
Nothing - other than to look as if they are doing something. It's the same nonsense we had when the police put an officer outside Edward Heath's home over similar allegations. Mind you, given the nonsense which is going on with the judicial inquiry into historic child abuse (which is a FUBAR on stilts) there's not much hope of anything sensible emerging when an investigation is confused with therapy for victims. The two are not the same.
It's pointless and cruel sentimentality to confuse the two.
Investigations should be focused, should be led by tough, trained investigators who know what they are doing, written in clear language and should aim to be quick. You can get 80-90% of what you need to know pretty quickly IMO. Sometimes spending 90% of your time on gathering 10% of the information is pointless.
When the approach is, we know that they're guilty, now where's the evidence, one runs the same risks as we saw repeatedly from Police behaviour in the 1960s and 1970s.
I'm no criminal lawyer but claimants are referred to as victims there is a presumption of guilt and honesty which, without evidence, I'm extremely uncomfortable with.
Me too.
The presumption of innocence is a very very important protection. It is precisely because child abuse is such a vile crime that one should cherish this important part of our criminal law even more.
The MacAlpine affair should have taught us this - at the very least. Even victims (alleged victims) can be wrong and can be manipulated and such an accusation leaves a stain which no amount of weasel worded apologies will remove. That is why a court - with a jury - and evidence which is tested is the proper forum for determining such matters. Not the court of public opinion or the media, all of whom have their own - often short-term and ill-informed - agendas.
As for these events being too distant in time, I believe that the police are currently engaged in investigating allegations made against a former Bishop of Chichester relating to events of the early 1950s. The Bishop concerned died in 1958!
Why are the police investigating a dead person?
That did occur to me simply because he cannot be charged or prosecuted. However, a man has made allegations of abuse relating to the early 1950s.
But if the suspect is dead, what are the police hoping to achieve?
Nothing - other than to look as if they are doing something. It's the same nonsense we had when the police put an officer outside Edward Heath's home over similar allegations. Mind you, given the nonsense which is going on with the judicial inquiry into historic child abuse (which is a FUBAR on stilts) there's not much hope of anything sensible emerging when an investigation is confused with therapy for victims. The two are not the same.
It's pointless and cruel sentimentality to confuse the two.
Investigations should be focused, should be led by tough, trained investigators who know what they are doing, written in clear language and should aim to be quick. You can get 80-90% of what you need to know pretty quickly IMO. Sometimes spending 90% of your time on gathering 10% of the information is pointless.
When the approach is, we know that they're guilty, now where's the evidence, one runs the same risks as we saw repeatedly from Police behaviour in the 1960s and 1970s.
I'm no criminal lawyer but claimants are referred to as victims there is a presumption of guilt and honesty which, without evidence, I'm extremely uncomfortable with.
Yes when they refer to people as victims then it presumes guilt on the part of the defendant. That is, IMO, a step too far. We need the police to investigate rather than use their current approach of "listen and believe" or "credible and true". Its has led to too many destroyed lives. As a younger cousin of mine pointed out yesterday, society is now moving to a "feels before reals" approach where people's feelings are more important than facts and evidence.
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
*DYOR – longstanding PBers will recall I have been way too pessimistic on the DEM ECV in recent years.
You have a plausible map except Trump taking Wisconsin.
Out of interest, why is Florida the swingiest of swing States? Republican in 1992, 2000, 2004. Democratic in 1996, 2008, 2012, and a toss up now. And closely fought every time.
The latest shenanigans exposed from the Clinton camp make for entertaining reading. The DNC leaking questions to Shillary ahead of a debate with Sanders and then specifically denying it. When you consider how reluctant many Sanders supporters are to vote for someone they believe had the election rigged in her favour by the DNC, this is significant damage.
What time in the UK do results start coming through? If I get up at 4am how far along will we be?
I see the massive DNC pile on re Comey continues apace. It's so OTT, even by Trump standards.
He's 10yr tenure with 7 left.
As Congressman Gowdy said in your link earlier today – Democrats should point the finger in the right place, not at the guy doing his job. Hillary has no one to blame but herself.
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
*DYOR – longstanding PBers will recall I have been way too pessimistic on the DEM ECV in recent years.
You have a plausible map except Trump taking Wisconsin.
Out of interest, why is Florida the swingiest of swing States? Republican in 1992, 2000, 2004. Democratic in 1996, 2008, 2012, and a toss up now. And closely fought every time.
If you look at the demographics it almost exactly matches the country in terms of race.
Dunno. Been trying to pseudo-crunch the numbers these past few days. Reckon the mini Emails Strikes Back 'scandal' might be worth a point or two to the Trumptons. But that won't be enough, particularly with the gearing caused by early voting (which looks mostly good for Hillary), to change the result. It may, however, lead to value in the state markets.
That all said, I have been forecasting that Trump will carry FL for a while. I'm not changing from my central forecast of Hillary by 284 to 254*
*DYOR – longstanding PBers will recall I have been way too pessimistic on the DEM ECV in recent years.
You have a plausible map except Trump taking Wisconsin.
Out of interest, why is Florida the swingiest of swing States? Republican in 1992, 2000, 2004. Democratic in 1996, 2008, 2012, and a toss up now. And closely fought every time.
There are cross currents of demographic trends but have on balance edged the state blue - older retirees against rising AA and Hispanic voters. More long term the state will go bluer especially as Cuban Americans now make up only 30% of Hispanics. It is also has one of the best GOP state organizations.
I foolishly followed these links and the actual line is "get a state department career lawyer to go through all the emails and PULL the official ones".
Plato, Plato, Plato. I know we're all supposed to believe you're doing it because you're fed up with the "handwaving", have a unique channel to angry Trumpland, and because this is apparently useful Intel for a betting site.
– Clinton led Trump by 9 pts among women 2 weeks ago. Now he's up 47-42
– 4% of voters said FBI news changed their vote
That really is huge news. I wonder what difference it made with men? Presumably significantly less, as they were already going to Trump in bigger numbers, but if there is a noteable move there too - this could yet be a fascinating week....
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
It#s all unravelling for the Democrats.You are going to be proved right.
The quote from the tweet doesn't match the linked e-mail.
You have a keen eye Mr Alistair – someone has swapped ‘pull the official ones’, for ‘delete the official ones’. – Safe to say however, it means the same thing.
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
The quote from the tweet doesn't match the linked e-mail.
You have a keen eye Mr Alistair – someone has swapped ‘pull the official ones’, for ‘delete the official ones’. – Safe to say however, it means the same thing.
Hardly. Unless you're in the dissembling business.
The quote from the tweet doesn't match the linked e-mail.
You have a keen eye Mr Alistair – someone has swapped ‘pull the official ones’, for ‘delete the official ones’. – Safe to say however, it means the same thing.
There's also this, which will become a talking point too:
"Btw you know as well as I every god damn cabinet officer and WH staff uses there gmail account!"
So basically, all of Government has shit security....
Prince of Taranto, I still think Clinton will win. She'll have a relatively huge advantage in early voting, and Trump's still despised by enough people that an on-the-day victory would still be tight. Clinton remains in pole position.
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
CNN rigging the debate for Clinton. Sadly as surprising that the Pope is a catholic. This is a very tainted election.
Trump should demand a further debate, where he has advance sight of the questions, but Hillary doesn't....
It just feeds into Trump's meme of a crooked establishment doing all they can to shoe-horn Crooked Hillary into the White House. I have no desire to see President Trump, but I have to think this is playing absolutely into his hands. Idiotic stuff from the Clinton campaign.
Prince of Taranto, I still think Clinton will win. She'll have a relatively huge advantage in early voting, and Trump's still despised by enough people that an on-the-day victory would still be tight. Clinton remains in pole position.
Maybe, but momentum is all with Trump at the moment.
The quote from the tweet doesn't match the linked e-mail.
You have a keen eye Mr Alistair – someone has swapped ‘pull the official ones’, for ‘delete the official ones’. – Safe to say however, it means the same thing.
Hardly. Unless you're in the dissembling business.
The politicians concerned are in the dissembling business!
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
CNN rigging the debate for Clinton. Sadly as surprising that the Pope is a catholic. This is a very tainted election.
Brazile sacked by CNN, she’s now the interim chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), a post she took over after Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who stepped down in the wake of leaked emails suggesting she and her staff fixed things in favour of Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.- Wasserman Schultz then joined Clinton’s campaign team.
It's not foolish to follow the links. It's important to do so otherwise you might believe the libelous lies Plato posts.
Plato has done this site a big service in posting contrary views to the 80%+ of the USA stuff that is pro-Clinton.
Seconded. Most on here don't want Trump, are appalled by Trump, can't conceive how any rational person would vote for Trump....and aren't Americans and don't have a vote. Whichever way you look at this,as a minimum, 40-odd percent of Americans will vote for Trump. Trying to understand his appeal to them is far more worthy of scrutiny than the "Isn't he just AWFUL???" which is the contribution of all too many.
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
Corbyn coming round to undiluted capitalism, interesting !
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
What's that little symbol before the 'at' sign. Or is it just my laptop playing silly buggers.
i.e. Is it a new twitter fad or a poorly patched PC?
The quote from the tweet doesn't match the linked e-mail.
You have a keen eye Mr Alistair – someone has swapped ‘pull the official ones’, for ‘delete the official ones’. – Safe to say however, it means the same thing.
There's also this, which will become a talking point too:
"Btw you know as well as I every god damn cabinet officer and WH staff uses there gmail account!"
So basically, all of Government has shit security....
That was never the point - if she had simply owned up and said 'It was Standard Operating Procedure for most of us' - it would have been over. But she didn't, she simply lied and then tried to conceal the extent of the security risk by using a 'bleaching' programme. Then Loretta Lynch met Bill Clinton.
The issue is about the lie, the appearance of one law for the little people, one law for the chosen.
This is from last year, but clearly being reprised to demonstrate swamp behaviour.
John Podhortez Obama DOJ colluded with IRS to seek criminal sanction against organizations opposing the president. This is big. https://t.co/tpxR2gAGCX
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
I'm sure the voters of Sunderland have noticed that Labour would have thrown them to the wolves.....
It's not foolish to follow the links. It's important to do so otherwise you might believe the libelous lies Plato posts.
Plato has done this site a big service in posting contrary views to the 80%+ of the USA stuff that is pro-Clinton.
Seconded. Most on here don't want Trump, are appalled by Trump, can't conceive how any rational person would vote for Trump....and aren't Americans and don't have a vote. Whichever way you look at this,as a minimum, 40-odd percent of Americans will vote for Trump. Trying to understand his appeal to them is far more worthy of scrutiny than the "Isn't he just AWFUL???" which is the contribution of all too many.
Even quite a lot of people who will vote for Trump are appalled by him. But, they're more appalled by the alternative.
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
CNN rigging the debate for Clinton. Sadly as surprising that the Pope is a catholic. This is a very tainted election.
Brazile sacked by CNN, she’s now the interim chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), a post she took over after Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who stepped down in the wake of leaked emails suggesting she and her staff fixed things in favour of Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.- Wasserman Schultz then joined Clinton’s campaign team.
A right old sleazy merry-go-round.
And yet people on this site unashamedly support Clinton when it is obvious that the epithet Trump attached to her is totally accurate. She is now under 2 1/2 FBI investigations.
It's not foolish to follow the links. It's important to do so otherwise you might believe the libelous lies Plato posts.
Plato has done this site a big service in posting contrary views to the 80%+ of the USA stuff that is pro-Clinton.
Seconded. Most on here don't want Trump, are appalled by Trump, can't conceive how any rational person would vote for Trump....and aren't Americans and don't have a vote. Whichever way you look at this,as a minimum, 40-odd percent of Americans will vote for Trump. Trying to understand his appeal to them is far more worthy of scrutiny than the "Isn't he just AWFUL???" which is the contribution of all too many.
Give over. She's not Edward Murrow, she's a peddler of Twitter junk. And the occasional deceit, as we've just seen.
– Clinton led Trump by 9 pts among women 2 weeks ago. Now he's up 47-42
– 4% of voters said FBI news changed their vote
That really is huge news. I wonder what difference it made with men? Presumably significantly less, as they were already going to Trump in bigger numbers, but if there is a noteable move there too - this could yet be a fascinating week....
It's not foolish to follow the links. It's important to do so otherwise you might believe the libelous lies Plato posts.
Plato has done this site a big service in posting contrary views to the 80%+ of the USA stuff that is pro-Clinton.
Seconded. Most on here don't want Trump, are appalled by Trump, can't conceive how any rational person would vote for Trump....and aren't Americans and don't have a vote. Whichever way you look at this,as a minimum, 40-odd percent of Americans will vote for Trump. Trying to understand his appeal to them is far more worthy of scrutiny than the "Isn't he just AWFUL???" which is the contribution of all too many.
20% GOP faithful + 10% desperate for a change from the status quo + 10% true trump believers
Actual % values may vary (I haven't convinced myself), but I think the categories are pretty reasonable.
As posted below by others you've (as always) posted some good stuff. Some of which has been a balance to the comfortable assumption of a Clinton victory.
Trump may win, and Trump may have all sorts of good things on his side, but I struggle to see beyond the buffoon.
(If I was a US citizen I'd vote for Hillary because her sort of corruption and nastiness is just what we've (they've) always had.)
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
What's that little symbol before the 'at' sign. Or is it just my laptop playing silly buggers.
i.e. Is it a new twitter fad or a poorly patched PC?
Howard Kurtosis CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
CNN rigging the debate for Clinton. Sadly as surprising that the Pope is a catholic. This is a very tainted election.
Brazile sacked by CNN, she’s now the interim chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), a post she took over after Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who stepped down in the wake of leaked emails suggesting she and her staff fixed things in favour of Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.- Wasserman Schultz then joined Clinton’s campaign team.
A right old sleazy merry-go-round.
And yet people on this site unashamedly support Clinton when it is obvious that the epithet Trump attached to her is totally accurate. She is now under 2 1/2 FBI investigations.
Who are these unashamed supporters?
The sheer awfulness of Trump forces one to support Clinton. Having said that, and despite the untold FBI investigations, wiki-leaks, dickyleaks and whatever bull kaka Plato can find on Twitter and Breitbart --- I've yet to see a smoking gun on Hillary.
Perhaps the crooked Hillary thing is an alt-right fantasy after all?
It's not foolish to follow the links. It's important to do so otherwise you might believe the libelous lies Plato posts.
Plato has done this site a big service in posting contrary views to the 80%+ of the USA stuff that is pro-Clinton.
Seconded. Most on here don't want Trump, are appalled by Trump, can't conceive how any rational person would vote for Trump....and aren't Americans and don't have a vote. Whichever way you look at this,as a minimum, 40-odd percent of Americans will vote for Trump. Trying to understand his appeal to them is far more worthy of scrutiny than the "Isn't he just AWFUL???" which is the contribution of all too many.
20% GOP faithful + 10% desperate for a change from the status quo + 10% true trump believers
Actual % values may vary (I haven't convinced myself), but I think the categories are pretty reasonable.
I believe this book is being touted as a good explanation for what's happening:
Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis by J. D. Vance
It attempts to explain what deindustrialisation has meant for real people on the ground.
It's not foolish to follow the links. It's important to do so otherwise you might believe the libelous lies Plato posts.
Plato has done this site a big service in posting contrary views to the 80%+ of the USA stuff that is pro-Clinton.
Seconded. Most on here don't want Trump, are appalled by Trump, can't conceive how any rational person would vote for Trump....and aren't Americans and don't have a vote. Whichever way you look at this,as a minimum, 40-odd percent of Americans will vote for Trump. Trying to understand his appeal to them is far more worthy of scrutiny than the "Isn't he just AWFUL???" which is the contribution of all too many.
And that's why you don't understand why flyover America is so mad. Their income has been slashed while those on the coasts who play the markets have been given free money to keep gambling. Main street is seething, and wants a total reset.
In that way there is a similarity to Brexit, in that low and middle income wage earners feel that they have been totally screwed for years and want a change to the order of things, where honest toil and 'Mom & Pop' business risk is rewarded. The hardware store owner should be able to live a reasonable life, and should never be asked to bail out financial gamblers. Both the Fed and the EU are seen by these people as the prop up for the financial gamblers.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a spreadsheet on US election night which tells us which candidate is performing better than expected as the results come in.
Unless women in Indiana are wired differently, it's reasonable to think that a big swing could be relevant elsewhere.
I wouldn't base any substantive judgement on a poll of 402 !!
24 is the new 'gold standard' "n" 8)
I regret we're going to go through this storm of over-reaction every time an unusual poll or morsel of seemingly insightful information hits twitter et al.
PBers need to keep their focus on reliable state polling, correct early voting data and above all ....
Whoever it was who described it as Cherie Blair versus Nigel Farage had a pretty good handle on it.
Edited extra bit: that said, I think both of those would be better than either of the US contenders.
I'd now accept PJ O'Rourke's view that Clinton is "wrong within normal parameters." She's sleazy and left wing, but you could at least trust her with the nuclear firing codes. I'm not sure you could trust Trump with them.
But, I hope the Republicans retain the House and Senate.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a spreadsheet on US election night which tells us which candidate is performing better than expected as the results come in.
The sheer awfulness of Trump forces one to support Clinton. Having said that, and despite the untold FBI investigations, wiki-leaks, dickyleaks and whatever bull kaka Plato can find on Twitter and Breitbart --- I've yet to see a smoking gun on Hillary.
Perhaps the crooked Hillary thing is an alt-right fantasy after all?
Perhaps tens of millions of American voters aren't looking for as high a standard of absolute proof that you seem to need before doubting St Hillary.
If Trump was as sheer awful to them as he is to you, then why did Hillary not just stand atop the moral high ground and enjoy the view? Instead, she's down in the sewers trying to out-sleaze Trump.
Or maybe, just maybe, that is the only operating procedure she knows?
Wouldn't it be nice to have a spreadsheet on US election night which tells us which candidate is performing better than expected as the results come in.
It would be terrific – I think we’re all hoping you have produced the goods (again)..!
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
What's that little symbol before the 'at' sign. Or is it just my laptop playing silly buggers. i.e. Is it a new twitter fad or a poorly patched PC?
Wouldn't it be nice to have a spreadsheet on US election night which tells us which candidate is performing better than expected as the results come in.
It would!
I assume the states will roll in their votes on the various networks at roughly the same order as last time.
BBC News at 6 opening statement. "anger at ... govt decision... into the worst clashes of the miners strike ...." "Govt accused of a ... stitch up" "Images of violence" commentary as police on horses rush forward.
Nothing about the stone and rock throwing at the police.
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
I'm sure the voters of Sunderland have noticed that Labour would have thrown them to the wolves.....
I suspect that there's a certain cohort of Remain ultras - and not just in Labour - who will have felt very let down by the fact that Nissan didn't pull the plug, on the new models at least if not on the entire plant. Firstly, because they would be pleased to see people in Sunderland punished for having helped to take their previous EU membership card away. Secondly, to be able to crow over an event which might be claimed to have proven them right. And thirdly, because the best of the slim chances they have of reversing the referendum result is to block A50, and that could probably only be achieved by having such an avalanche of economic disasters (that could be pinned on Brexit) strike the country in rapid succession, that a significant number of Tory MPs might be willing to think twice about pushing the button.
Purely on the issue of Labour and Sunderland, there is about as much chance of any of the Sunderland seats giving their Labour MPs the elbow as there is of me discovering the Unified Field Theory and winning the Nobel Prize in Physics. They're the very epitome of red rosette on a pig territory.
Whoever it was who described it as Cherie Blair versus Nigel Farage had a pretty good handle on it.
Edited extra bit: that said, I think both of those would be better than either of the US contenders.
I'd now accept PJ O'Rourke's view that Clinton is "wrong within normal parameters." She's sleazy and left wing, but you could at least trust her with the nuclear firing codes. I'm not sure you could trust Trump with them.
But, I hope the Republicans retain the House and Senate.
The problem with Clinton is at least three-fold:
1. The Clinton Foundation has clearly been used to buy favour from the Clintons. Hillary can say she (and Bill) has never personally benefitted, but *at best* it's an appalling look for someone who hopes to be President. She ought to have shut it down or placed into a clearly independent trusteeship.
2. She hasn't come up through classic, community or issue-centred political activity. She's come up by gaining control of the DNC and by being Bill's wife. She has no bedrock of support outside the party. Hence she is quite unloved - she's never really had to mobilise political support in the real world.
3. As the wife of a former President, her candidacy perpetuates a grotesque incestuousness in US political circles.
For all that, I've seen nothing to suggest she's done anything illegal. She has administrative experience in both domestic and foreign policy. She would be respected abroad.
She's clearly the "best" candidate.
I'm hoping Trump goes down big time and the Republicans lose everything going. They need a historic defeat to rediscover their principles and their raison d'etre.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a spreadsheet on US election night which tells us which candidate is performing better than expected as the results come in.
It would be terrific – I think we’re all hoping you have produced the goods (again)..!
Have you?
It's difficult because you only get partial results from the US, not final ones from each area as is the case in this country.
Just watching the Six O' Clock News, and a succession of faux-enraged Labour MPs bellowing about "justice" and "establishment stitch-ups" over Orgreave.
Makes you wonder why they didn't hold a public inquiry during their thirteen years in power, doesn't it?
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
I'm sure the voters of Sunderland have noticed that Labour would have thrown them to the wolves.....
I suspect that there's a certain cohort of Remain ultras - and not just in Labour - who will have felt very let down by the fact that Nissan didn't pull the plug, on the new models at least if not on the entire plant. Firstly, because they would be pleased to see people in Sunderland punished for having helped to take their previous EU membership card away. Secondly, to be able to crow over an event which might be claimed to have proven them right. And thirdly, because the best of the slim chances they have of reversing the referendum result is to block A50, and that could probably only be achieved by having such an avalanche of economic disasters (that could be pinned on Brexit) strike the country in rapid succession, that a significant number of Tory MPs might be willing to think twice about pushing the button.
Purely on the issue of Labour and Sunderland, there is about as much chance of any of the Sunderland seats giving their Labour MPs the elbow as there is of me discovering the Unified Field Theory and winning the Nobel Prize in Physics. They're the very epitome of red rosette on a pig territory.
Tim Montgomerie ن@montie Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
I'm sure the voters of Sunderland have noticed that Labour would have thrown them to the wolves.....
I suspect that there's a certain cohort of Remain ultras - and not just in Labour - who will have felt very let down by the fact that Nissan didn't pull the plug, on the new models at least if not on the entire plant. Firstly, because they would be pleased to see people in Sunderland punished for having helped to take their previous EU membership card away. Secondly, to be able to crow over an event which might be claimed to have proven them right. And thirdly, because the best of the slim chances they have of reversing the referendum result is to block A50, and that could probably only be achieved by having such an avalanche of economic disasters (that could be pinned on Brexit) strike the country in rapid succession, that a significant number of Tory MPs might be willing to think twice about pushing the button.
Purely on the issue of Labour and Sunderland, there is about as much chance of any of the Sunderland seats giving their Labour MPs the elbow as there is of me discovering the Unified Field Theory and winning the Nobel Prize in Physics. They're the very epitome of red rosette on a pig territory.
Comments
'The Orgreave decision represents a great victory for the Arbeit Macht Frei wing of the Tory party! Herman Goering would have been so proud of Amber Rudd, and been confident that she would have found good reasons not to launch an enquiry into the opening of concentration camps in 1933.'
So the New Labour government was even worse as they had 13 years to investigate Orgreave,but also realized it would be a complete waste of time and taxpayers money.
I'm no criminal lawyer but claimants are referred to as victims there is a presumption of guilt and honesty which, without evidence, I'm extremely uncomfortable with.
What the police themselves have said would be a good start.
IMO we are so obsessed with uncovering alleged crimes by dead people - with the concomitant grandstanding and posturing - that we are at risk of not properly investigating crimes being committed now. Far easier to get outraged by what long since dead people are alleged to have done than to take effective steps to protect children now and catch, investigate and prosecute their abusers (and those who protect them) now.
The latter involves hard work. The former involves a lot of emoting and air time in the media.
(As I say, I have a tendency to be cynical.)
Always an annual event that inevitably never goes anywhere.
He's 10yr tenure with 7 left.
The presumption of innocence is a very very important protection. It is precisely because child abuse is such a vile crime that one should cherish this important part of our criminal law even more.
The MacAlpine affair should have taught us this - at the very least. Even victims (alleged victims) can be wrong and can be manipulated and such an accusation leaves a stain which no amount of weasel worded apologies will remove. That is why a court - with a jury - and evidence which is tested is the proper forum for determining such matters. Not the court of public opinion or the media, all of whom have their own - often short-term and ill-informed - agendas.
What time in the UK do results start coming through? If I get up at 4am how far along will we be?
Micro Spooky Leaks
#PodestaEmails24: "get a state department career lawyer to go through all the emails and delete the official ones" https://t.co/olfT4SEKJQ https://t.co/gJ2XWMkkcx
ALSO via Monmouth:
– Clinton led Trump by 9 pts among women 2 weeks ago. Now he's up 47-42
– 4% of voters said FBI news changed their vote
https://twitter.com/tbonier/status/793065727397879809?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Plato, Plato, Plato. I know we're all supposed to believe you're doing it because you're fed up with the "handwaving", have a unique channel to angry Trumpland, and because this is apparently useful Intel for a betting site.
But this is a fraud.
CNN has accepted Donna Brazile's resignation, saying it is "completely uncomfortable" with her leaking Qs in advance to the Clinton camp
"Btw you know as well as I every god damn cabinet officer and WH staff uses there gmail account!"
So basically, all of Government has shit security....
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
President has complete confidence in AG Lynch
It just feeds into Trump's meme of a crooked establishment doing all they can to shoe-horn Crooked Hillary into the White House. I have no desire to see President Trump, but I have to think this is playing absolutely into his hands. Idiotic stuff from the Clinton campaign.
And not entirely sure Plato spends any time considering them.
I'll get my hood....
Prince of Taranto, I agree, but I don't think it's enough.
Last week's Labour message: Tories are only helping the City. This week's Labour message: Tories did too much to help car manufacturer
A right old sleazy merry-go-round.
i.e. Is it a new twitter fad or a poorly patched PC?
The issue is about the lie, the appearance of one law for the little people, one law for the chosen.
John Podhortez
Obama DOJ colluded with IRS to seek criminal sanction against organizations opposing the president. This is big. https://t.co/tpxR2gAGCX
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-new-documents-reveal-doj-irs-and-fbi-plan-to-seek-criminal-charges-of-obama-opponents/
Actual % values may vary (I haven't convinced myself), but I think the categories are pretty reasonable.
As posted below by others you've (as always) posted some good stuff. Some of which has been a balance to the comfortable assumption of a Clinton victory.
Trump may win, and Trump may have all sorts of good things on his side, but I struggle to see beyond the buffoon.
(If I was a US citizen I'd vote for Hillary because her sort of corruption and nastiness is just what we've (they've) always had.)
Whoever it was who described it as Cherie Blair versus Nigel Farage had a pretty good handle on it.
Edited extra bit: that said, I think both of those would be better than either of the US contenders.
The sheer awfulness of Trump forces one to support Clinton. Having said that, and despite the untold FBI investigations, wiki-leaks, dickyleaks and whatever bull kaka Plato can find on Twitter and Breitbart --- I've yet to see a smoking gun on Hillary.
Perhaps the crooked Hillary thing is an alt-right fantasy after all?
Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis by J. D. Vance
It attempts to explain what deindustrialisation has meant for real people on the ground.
In that way there is a similarity to Brexit, in that low and middle income wage earners feel that they have been totally screwed for years and want a change to the order of things, where honest toil and 'Mom & Pop' business risk is rewarded. The hardware store owner should be able to live a reasonable life, and should never be asked to bail out financial gamblers. Both the Fed and the EU are seen by these people as the prop up for the financial gamblers.
PBers need to keep their focus on reliable state polling, correct early voting data and above all ....
FOP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But, I hope the Republicans retain the House and Senate.
If Trump was as sheer awful to them as he is to you, then why did Hillary not just stand atop the moral high ground and enjoy the view? Instead, she's down in the sewers trying to out-sleaze Trump.
Or maybe, just maybe, that is the only operating procedure she knows?
Have you?
A schedule would be a good place to start.
"Images of violence" commentary as police on horses rush forward.
Nothing about the stone and rock throwing at the police.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/indiana/
Purely on the issue of Labour and Sunderland, there is about as much chance of any of the Sunderland seats giving their Labour MPs the elbow as there is of me discovering the Unified Field Theory and winning the Nobel Prize in Physics. They're the very epitome of red rosette on a pig territory.
1. The Clinton Foundation has clearly been used to buy favour from the Clintons. Hillary can say she (and Bill) has never personally benefitted, but *at best* it's an appalling look for someone who hopes to be President. She ought to have shut it down or placed into a clearly independent trusteeship.
2. She hasn't come up through classic, community or issue-centred political activity. She's come up by gaining control of the DNC and by being Bill's wife. She has no bedrock of support outside the party. Hence she is quite unloved - she's never really had to mobilise political support in the real world.
3. As the wife of a former President, her candidacy perpetuates a grotesque incestuousness in US political circles.
For all that, I've seen nothing to suggest she's done anything illegal. She has administrative experience in both domestic and foreign policy. She would be respected abroad.
She's clearly the "best" candidate.
I'm hoping Trump goes down big time and the Republicans lose everything going. They need a historic defeat to rediscover their principles and their raison d'etre.
Makes you wonder why they didn't hold a public inquiry during their thirteen years in power, doesn't it?