The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
You are predicting riots if he is elected?
The period in between his election and his inauguration is likely to be incredibly fractious as the fear factor is ramped up and the US establishment tries to blame each other for the outcome.
Democrat whining will make Brexit remainers seem like good losers
Obviously there's been a significant movement from Clinton to Trump in a short space of time since the FBI intervention (a swing of about 0.8% according to the 538 estimates). Presumably there's a similar amount still to come, as the new data work into the averages. But even a further swing of 0.8% would still leave Clinton with a 2.5% lead (again on the 538 figures). If Clinton really ended up with a lead of 2.5% in the popular vote, that would almost certainly be a winning margin.
It looks to me as though the real question is still the same as it's been all along - whether there's a systematic error in the polls. Though now, of course, a much smaller error would be enough to give Trump the election.
The narrowing of the polls and the appearance of lost momentum is obviously dangerous for Hillary. But not, IMO, as dangerous as the appearance of a foregone conclusion, which was where she was getting to.
If it looks close, the stop Trump vote will turn out.
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
I've gone back to thinking Trump won't do much. He's still a New York liberal billionaire. He'll get tough on migration and Mexicans, but he won't do much that will damage big business.
He will be nasty to the EU though. Who cares.
PS I still don't think he can possibly win. But I said the same of LEAVE
I suspect Trump's political views are actually quite malleable. He was effusive about the Clinton's barely 8 years ago.
His main problem is his narcissism, and belief the rules don't apply to him and he can say and do whatever he likes.
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
I've gone back to thinking Trump won't do much. He's still a New York liberal billionaire. He'll get tough on migration and Mexicans, but he won't do much that will damage big business.
He will be nasty to the EU though. Who cares.
PS I still don't think he can possibly win. But I said the same of LEAVE
Trump may be an econoimc liberal but not a social liberal.
The narrowing of the polls and the appearance of lost momentum is obviously dangerous for Hillary. But not, IMO, as dangerous as the appearance of a foregone conclusion, which was where she was getting to.
If it looks close, the stop Trump vote will turn out.
My view is a narrow Hillary win, now, but I have some insurance.
Obviously there's been a significant movement from Clinton to Trump in a short space of time since the FBI intervention (a swing of about 0.8% according to the 538 estimates). Presumably there's a similar amount still to come, as the new data work into the averages. But even a further swing of 0.8% would still leave Clinton with a 2.5% lead (again on the 538 figures). If Clinton really ended up with a lead of 2.5% in the popular vote, that would almost certainly be a winning margin.
It looks to me as though the real question is still the same as it's been all along - whether there's a systematic error in the polls. Though now, of course, a much smaller error would be enough to give Trump the election.
Latest Google consumer survey gives Trump a 3% lead in Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania OCT. 25-31 Google Consumer Surveys B 1,029 LV 37% 39% 4% Trump +3 Trump +3
Not really. I actually prefer women bosses. No testosterone. No 'mine's bigger than yours'. Much easier.
I have women bosses - my editors and my agent, in journalism and thriller-writing, nearly all women. Very easy to work for.
My agent has a theory that women make better leaders and men make better entrepreneurs. A glance at English royal history might say that's true, we've had three great queens out of seven or eight (depending how you define).
Elizabeth One and Two, and Victoria.
The percentage of great kings is much lower.
What makes QE2 'great', other than her longevity? No question about the other two, natch.
What makes Queent Elizabeth II great is her knowhow, a much under recognised talent.
Mr. D, neither am I. It's as ludicrous as the Westminster debate lambasting Trump.
Mr. T, slightly unfair comparison as the female sample size is much smaller. Empress Zoe of Byzantium was not good, and Queen Matilda (had a civil war with King Stephen) was so-so at best. And don't forget Isabella [he says, hoping he got the name right], Edward III's mother who had an affair with the man who (possibly) killed her husband and was stealing power from her son (possibly with an eye to murdering him).
That said, my cover artist is a lady, and very easy to work with.
The only female prime minister was one of the best in a century.
The only female German chancellor is historically popular (or was)
There is a pattern. In part it's just coz women (until recently) had to work harder to get as far as men, so only the very best triumphed. That's all been reversed of course by "women only shortlists" etc, mediocre women are preferred over more able men.
A few exceptions though eg Julia Gillard, Edith Cresson
I keep pointing it out. The massive shifts away from Hillary and weird weightings are really odd. If we applied less skewed ones, she's not winning much at all. And or herding and fiddling is going on. ABC launched their very pro Hillary tracker poll two weeks before the election - seriously?
Bill Mitchell FACTS: 2008, the Primaries were D+8 and the GE D+7. In 2016, the Primaries were R+1 and pollsters sampling D+10. D+10 polls have Trump +1.
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
Japanese nationalists are also looking forward to Trump.
He would be good for Japan in terms of its relationship with China, probably less good in terms of Japanese imports to the US
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
Congress is likely to still be GOP, at least the House and most GOP Representatives backed Brexit so they will get the deal through, regardless of who wins there will be trouble, if Hillary wins there might be trouble in the rustbelt and the South
Not really. I actually prefer women bosses. No testosterone. No 'mine's bigger than yours'. Much easier.
I have women bosses - my editors and my agent, in journalism and thriller-writing, nearly all women. Very easy to work for.
My agent has a theory that women make better leaders and men make better entrepreneurs. A glance at English royal history might say that's true, we've had three great queens out of seven or eight (depending how you define).
Elizabeth One and Two, and Victoria.
The percentage of great kings is much lower.
What makes QE2 'great', other than her longevity? No question about the other two, natch.
She has managed to remain relevant, popular, and important to people over a period of unprecedented change over the past 50 years, not least in the way the Royal Family is perceived and reported upon.
I keep pointing it out. The massive shifts away from Hillary and weird weightings are really odd. If we applied less skewed ones, she's not winning much at all. And or herding and fiddling is going on. ABC launched their very pro Hillary tracker poll two weeks before the election - seriously?
Bill Mitchell FACTS: 2008, the Primaries were D+8 and the GE D+7. In 2016, the Primaries were R+1 and pollsters sampling D+10. D+10 polls have Trump +1.
Mr. D, neither am I. It's as ludicrous as the Westminster debate lambasting Trump.
Mr. T, slightly unfair comparison as the female sample size is much smaller. Empress Zoe of Byzantium was not good, and Queen Matilda (had a civil war with King Stephen) was so-so at best. And don't forget Isabella [he says, hoping he got the name right], Edward III's mother who had an affair with the man who (possibly) killed her husband and was stealing power from her son (possibly with an eye to murdering him).
That said, my cover artist is a lady, and very easy to work with.
The only female prime minister was one of the best in a century.
The only female German chancellor is historically popular (or was)
There is a pattern. In part it's just coz women (until recently) had to work harder to get as far as men, so only the very best triumphed. That's all been reversed of course by "women only shortlists" etc, mediocre women are preferred over more able men.
A few exceptions though eg Julia Gillard, Edith Cresson
Edith Cresson was appointed, and Gillard came to power without an election.
Not really. I actually prefer women bosses. No testosterone. No 'mine's bigger than yours'. Much easier.
I have women bosses - my editors and my agent, in journalism and thriller-writing, nearly all women. Very easy to work for.
My agent has a theory that women make better leaders and men make better entrepreneurs. A glance at English royal history might say that's true, we've had three great queens out of seven or eight (depending how you define).
Elizabeth One and Two, and Victoria.
The percentage of great kings is much lower.
What makes QE2 'great', other than her longevity? No question about the other two, natch.
The fact we still have a successfully monarchy is enough to qualify in the 21st Century. She has tanen the monarchy (almost imperceptibly) from something with a tiny bit of constitutional power to purely ceremonial attached to one of the best global tourism / marketing campaigns in the world.
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
Congress is likely to still be GOP, at least the House and most GOP Representatives backed Brexit so they will get the deal through, regardless of who wins there will be trouble, if Hillary wins there might be trouble in the rustbelt and the South
That's not the way it works with Congress and trade deals. State pressure is what counts and if any state looks like doing badly out of any trade deal with anyone the relevant Congressman will block it. Just look at the precedent and how long these deals take to get sign-off. As for trouble: if Clinton wins it is likely to be bombs and shootings; if Trump does it will be riots and shootings.
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in contrast to the pro-EU Hillary. The main beneficiaries of a Trump presidency would be Putin's Russia, Brexit UK and Netanyahu's Israel, the rest of the world would be better off under Hillary. I still think a Trump popular vote win is more likely than an electoral college win though
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
You are predicting riots if he is elected?
The period in between his election and his inauguration is likely to be incredibly fractious as the fear factor is ramped up and the US establishment tries to blame each other for the outcome.
Democrat whining will make Brexit remainers seem like good losers
They'll be too busy ripping the Clinton machine to shreds to spend time whining about Trump.
Mr. Glenn, it did for Napoleon. Hubris foreshadows nemesis.
Then again, Caesar was full of himself. But he won two wars. And then enjoyed just less than a year before his own side turned him into a human pincushion.
The narrowing of the polls and the appearance of lost momentum is obviously dangerous for Hillary. But not, IMO, as dangerous as the appearance of a foregone conclusion, which was where she was getting to.
If it looks close, the stop Trump vote will turn out.
But, judging by the favourability polling, there is now a very substantial Stop Hillary vote, as well. They really do dislike her intensely.
So do I. I'm not sure why. She gives me the bloody creeps.
Clinton has been around too long. Like sitcom or a band, you only have so long at the top before people get sick and tired of you. There is nothing to do about it.
Clinton has been a leading national political figure for 25 years. Who knows what people will feel when the clock gets to thirty years.
despite the narrow polls, i think clinton and the dems have enough of an EV advantage to win
I also feel that there are a lot of shy Clinton voters out there, and republican women are in no way voting in great numbers for self confessed pussy grabber Trump
I've nothing against Vettel, but that crossed a line and he should take some manner of punishment.
Wrong decision IMHO.
Should have fined him $100,000 and given him 30 days' "Community Service" with the FIA road safety programme, if they thought a sporting penalty inappropriate.
Mr. D, neither am I. It's as ludicrous as the Westminster debate lambasting Trump.
Mr. T, slightly unfair comparison as the female sample size is much smaller. Empress Zoe of Byzantium was not good, and Queen Matilda (had a civil war with King Stephen) was so-so at best. And don't forget Isabella [he says, hoping he got the name right], Edward III's mother who had an affair with the man who (possibly) killed her husband and was stealing power from her son (possibly with an eye to murdering him).
That said, my cover artist is a lady, and very easy to work with.
The only female prime minister was one of the best in a century.
The only female German chancellor is historically popular (or was)
There is a pattern. In part it's just coz women (until recently) had to work harder to get as far as men, so only the very best triumphed. That's all been reversed of course by "women only shortlists" etc, mediocre women are preferred over more able men.
A few exceptions though eg Julia Gillard, Edith Cresson
Edith Cresson was appointed, and Gillard came to power without an election.
Gillard did win the 2010 election though by the narrowest of margins
The Trump surge continues, now up to 29.4% on 538 (polls+forecast)!
Its getting exciting.
Are any of the Clinton lumpers getting the heeby jeebies yet ?
Getting nervous, but holding on. Demographics.
The wave might be so big that demographics get washed away. That's what I fear.
Hispanics may save the day. 69% absolutely certain to vote according to Luntz (quoting Pew).
But 20% of them are breaking for Trump, so it might not be as positive as we hope.
If Hillary was even 10% better we would already be in the clear. Bloody DNC idiots. They tied it up for her and now she's close to losing to the worst GOP candidate of all time.
I am getting that familiar sinking feeling. It looks like Trump could do it. And that would be a catastrophe for the US and, by extension, us.
Not for us necessarily, Trump's trade adviser has said he would do a trade deal with Brexit UK ahead of the EU in
I am not sure being one of Trump America's three friends is going to do us a huge amount of good. Any trade deal would have to be negotiated and then signed off by Congress. A long process. In the meantime, there is no knowing what he might do and what might unfold in the US itself. I so think it will be worth avoiding for a while after he is inaugurated. There will undoubtedly be significant trouble in the cities.
Congress is likely to still be GOP, at least the House and most GOP Representatives backed Brexit so they will get the deal through, regardless of who wins there will be trouble, if Hillary wins there might be trouble in the rustbelt and the South
That's not the way it works with Congress and trade deals. State pressure is what counts and if any state looks like doing badly out of any trade deal with anyone the relevant Congressman will block it. Just look at the precedent and how long these deals take to get sign-off. As for trouble: if Clinton wins it is likely to be bombs and shootings; if Trump does it will be riots and shootings.
Yes but if Trump does a deal first with the UK before the EU it makes it that much quicker to get it through, Hillary on the other hand would certainly do a deal with the EU first
Mr. Sandpit, not giving any penalty at all sends the wrong signal entirely.
I do wonder if Vettel may end up jumping ship if next season goes poorly. McLaren/Mercedes next?
I think Charlie knows he f***** up on Sunday and Vettel's suffered enough. Doesn't excuse Vettel's behaviour, but I'll be honest, it was just about the only interesting thing about the race. They probably don't want the drivers to tone down the radio chat.
My advice to Vettel, or any of the other drivers for that matter, if they don't like the way F1 has gone, try something else. The oval racing in the US is very exciting and doesn't have the nonsense of giving up position when someone goes off the track. A mistake on an oval ends up with a big crash and the end of the race.
I too am struggling to see this much vaunted early voting advantage for Hillary. I'm going back to Cohn's site now for a proper read.
Meanwhile, from a purely betting point of view, I could be in clover here - any Trump win, I cash in. A narrow Hillary win, I also profit thanks to the silly 6/1 on Dem 270-299 available yesterday. My only loser is the Hillary blowout. But Hillary 300+ *should* lengthen considerably given recent goings on, so may soon be able to cover that too at good odds.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
In all fairness, there really hasn't been a great deal of polls that give Trumpton the win. And yes, PB is over-reacting. That doesn't mean that there hasn't been a shift - there certainly has - but we have overdone it, as always.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
In all fairness, there really hasn't been a great deal of polls that give Trumpton the win. And yes, PB is over-reacting. That doesn't mean that there hasn't been a shift - there certainly has - but we have overdone it, as always.
Yep, he's not currently on course to win. But he's not on course to lose as badly as he was last week.
Preposterous. Ulster Loyalists are loyal to the crown. They're not going to give that up to some Federal president of "SCINI", and southern Irish will not kneel to the Queen. Next.
Not as long as they can get their Irish/EU passports.
Ms. Apocalypse, if Trump's down to 3.75 then any reaction here is quite measured.
3.75 re the betting? Betting is not my forte (which is odd given the site I'm on but there you go). Still, I've seen the betting market misjudge situations in the last year or so (the last GE and the EU Referendum).
Ms. Apocalypse, I shouldn't worry, this season it isn't mine either
[I didn't start betting until a couple of years after I joined the site, and have strong memories of not understanding how the hell anything worked. 3.75 is just under 3/1].
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Federal prosecutor Mary Jo White was appointed to investigate the pardon of Marc Rich. She was later replaced by then-Republican James Comey, who found no illegality on Clinton's part.
Mr. 86, by Whiting's mistake(s), do you mean the Vettel penalty, or not penalising the Mercedes for not bothering with the first corner?
For not penalising Verstappen to begin with. If they had gravel traps this wouldn't be an issue. Incidentally, tarmac run off areas have become an issue in MotoGP. Luis Salom was killed at Barcelona this year after he had a high speed impact with a tyre wall after a low side crash. At some point the bikes might have to stop running on F1 tracks.
If Trump does do it, he has an awful lot to thank Mike Pence for - particularly wrt Utah and Arizona I think.
If he wins narrowly, he will owe his victory entirely to James Comey.
More accurately, he’ll owe it to the disgraced ex-congressman, Anthony Weiner's laptop.
The point is that Weiner's laptop may contain nothing of relevance. Regardless of that, Comey decided to make an announcement, and that has had a very clear effect on the polls.
Supposing Clinton's lead ends up being cut by 4 points, and Trump wins the election by 2 points, and then it turns out that there's wasn't anything relevant on the laptop anyway?
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Federal prosecutor Mary Jo White was appointed to investigate the pardon of Marc Rich. She was later replaced by then-Republican James Comey, who found no illegality on Clinton's part.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Okay, so what other credible pollsters are showing Trump leads? Yesterday MORI and NBC had Clinton leading, from what I saw.
Did I say anything about Trump leading? Only that the polls had improved for him.
Well there's been a mood shift on here which suggests many think he can/will win, which is why I mentioned leads. I don't think that's too much of an unreasonable assumption.
Mr. 86, I agree with you on run-off. And Verstappen. He would've lost the place if he'd stayed on-track.
Safety's important, but if anyone wants to be totally safe then they should stop driving cars at 200mph. Gravel traps, grass or astroturf would deter drivers from making track limits optional. The race officials and regulators need to get a grip.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
In all fairness, there really hasn't been a great deal of polls that give Trumpton the win. And yes, PB is over-reacting. That doesn't mean that there hasn't been a shift - there certainly has - but we have overdone it, as always.
Yep, he's not currently on course to win. But he's not on course to lose as badly as he was last week.
Indeed, hence she was quite right to say we are over-reacting!
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
I've just noticed that the adjusted forecast includes a +1.5% trend adjustment for Trump. That is 0.2% per day until the election. I've been mentally adding a trend projection to Trump's share but it's already in his number.
The narrowing of the polls and the appearance of lost momentum is obviously dangerous for Hillary. But not, IMO, as dangerous as the appearance of a foregone conclusion, which was where she was getting to.
If it looks close, the stop Trump vote will turn out.
But, judging by the favourability polling, there is now a very substantial Stop Hillary vote, as well. They really do dislike her intensely.
So do I. I'm not sure why. She gives me the bloody creeps.
SCENE: HILARY CLINTON'S PHONE RINGS CLINTON: Hello? VOICE ON PHONE: Is that Secretary Clinton? CLINTON: Yes VOICE: Secretary Hillary Clinton? CLINTON: Yes? VOICE: Hillary Rodham Clinton? ...
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Okay, so what other credible pollsters are showing Trump leads? Yesterday MORI and NBC had Clinton leading, from what I saw.
Did I say anything about Trump leading? Only that the polls had improved for him.
Well there's been a mood shift on here which suggests many think he can/will win, which is why I mentioned leads. I don't think that's too much of an unreasonable assumption.
You can think someone is going to win without them presently being in the lead, if things are moving in the right direction etc.
Ms. Apocalypse, I shouldn't worry, this season it isn't mine either
[I didn't start betting until a couple of years after I joined the site, and have strong memories of not understanding how the hell anything worked. 3.75 is just under 3/1].
Tbh, I can easily see myself losing far too much money, at least if I got into betting right now. Maybe it's something to think about for the future....
Ms. Apocalypse, if Trump's down to 3.75 then any reaction here is quite measured.
3.75 re the betting? Betting is not my forte (which is odd given the site I'm on but there you go). Still, I've seen the betting market misjudge situations in the last year or so (the last GE and the EU Referendum).
Mr. Sandpit, not giving any penalty at all sends the wrong signal entirely.
I do wonder if Vettel may end up jumping ship if next season goes poorly. McLaren/Mercedes next?
I think Charlie knows he f***** up on Sunday and Vettel's suffered enough. Doesn't excuse Vettel's behaviour, but I'll be honest, it was just about the only interesting thing about the race. They probably don't want the drivers to tone down the radio chat.
My advice to Vettel, or any of the other drivers for that matter, if they don't like the way F1 has gone, try something else. The oval racing in the US is very exciting and doesn't have the nonsense of giving up position when someone goes off the track. A mistake on an oval ends up with a big crash and the end of the race.
He didn't 'f' up. He said straight away they would look at the incident and penalise Verstappen after the race if necessary. Which is exactly what happened. Vettel was also in line for a penalty and a more sever one at that so why is did he not moan about that not being imposed immediately. As it is he stole Ricciardo's place on the podium.
Ms. Apocalypse, I shouldn't worry, this season it isn't mine either
[I didn't start betting until a couple of years after I joined the site, and have strong memories of not understanding how the hell anything worked. 3.75 is just under 3/1].
Ms Apocolypse, 3.75 is 2.75/1, or 11/4 in old money. Hillary is still a 72% chance, so very much still the favourite. https://betdata.io/next-us-president
Ms. Apocalypse, if Trump's down to 3.75 then any reaction here is quite measured.
3.75 re the betting? Betting is not my forte (which is odd given the site I'm on but there you go). Still, I've seen the betting market misjudge situations in the last year or so (the last GE and the EU Referendum).
Ms. Apocalypse, if Trump's down to 3.75 then any reaction here is quite measured.
3.75 re the betting? Betting is not my forte (which is odd given the site I'm on but there you go). Still, I've seen the betting market misjudge situations in the last year or so (the last GE and the EU Referendum).
If Trump does do it, he has an awful lot to thank Mike Pence for - particularly wrt Utah and Arizona I think.
If he wins narrowly, he will owe his victory entirely to James Comey.
More accurately, he’ll owe it to the disgraced ex-congressman, Anthony Weiner's laptop.
The point is that Weiner's laptop may contain nothing of relevance. Regardless of that, Comey decided to make an announcement, and that has had a very clear effect on the polls.
Supposing Clinton's lead ends up being cut by 4 points, and Trump wins the election by 2 points, and then it turns out that there's wasn't anything relevant on the laptop anyway?
It’s a chicken or egg argument. Ultimately, only Clinton has herself to blame for the initial FBI investigation and the reopening of the second, ably assisted by Huma Abedin’s stupidity.
Ms. Apocalypse, good decision. Betting's something where it's easy to get carried away (as I discovered when an outburst of misplaced confidence led to three failed bets in the last race). And you need to keep sharply in mind that fortune as much or more than skill plays a role, and adjust stakes accordingly.
Still on small stakes, despite betting since 2009.
Ms. Apocalypse, I shouldn't worry, this season it isn't mine either
[I didn't start betting until a couple of years after I joined the site, and have strong memories of not understanding how the hell anything worked. 3.75 is just under 3/1].
Tbh, I can easily see myself losing far too much money, at least if I got into betting right now. Maybe it's something to think about for the future....
A good strategy is to bet AGAINST your favoured outcome, ideally at long odds!
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
Okay, so what other credible pollsters are showing Trump leads? Yesterday MORI and NBC had Clinton leading, from what I saw.
Did I say anything about Trump leading? Only that the polls had improved for him.
Well there's been a mood shift on here which suggests many think he can/will win, which is why I mentioned leads. I don't think that's too much of an unreasonable assumption.
You can think someone is going to win without them presently being in the lead, if things are moving in the right direction etc.
From the beginning I've thought that Clinton's big problem is that the majority of the people who are motivated either by her or by stopping Trump are in states that she will win anyway. In contrast Trump motivates people in the states he needs.
So far the takeaway from today is that Hillary's last best chance of changing the narrative by tying Trump to Russia has failed. She's now like a marathon running who's bonked with a mile to go and is now in a death march to the finish.
F1: apparently 50% chance of heavy rain for the next race (higher chance on the preceding day). If it's wet, that may make Hamilton the title favourite.
I never thought there would be a better headline than "Freddie Starr ate my hamster". However, I think "Michael Heseltine didn't strangle my Alsation" may just edge it.
If Trump does do it, he has an awful lot to thank Mike Pence for - particularly wrt Utah and Arizona I think.
If he wins narrowly, he will owe his victory entirely to James Comey.
More accurately, he’ll owe it to the disgraced ex-congressman, Anthony Weiner's laptop.
The point is that Weiner's laptop may contain nothing of relevance. Regardless of that, Comey decided to make an announcement, and that has had a very clear effect on the polls.
Supposing Clinton's lead ends up being cut by 4 points, and Trump wins the election by 2 points, and then it turns out that there's wasn't anything relevant on the laptop anyway?
It’s a chicken or egg argument. Ultimately, only Clinton has herself to blame for the initial FBI investigation and the reopening of the second, ably assisted by Huma Abedin’s stupidity.
Indeed, and the corollary of Chris' position is that he would have the US electorate vote in ignorance of a very pertinent investigation. Not sure how that leads to an informed vote.
Mr. 86, I agree with you on run-off. And Verstappen. He would've lost the place if he'd stayed on-track.
Safety's important, but if anyone wants to be totally safe then they should stop driving cars at 200mph. Gravel traps, grass or astroturf would deter drivers from making track limits optional. The race officials and regulators need to get a grip.
I was very disappointed to hear Martin Brundle defending tarmac runoffs recently. In the past he has been rather incredulous to drivers exceedingly track limits at turn 3 at Barcelona. His words were "in my day you'd end up in hospital doing that." Now he sounds like the mouthpiece for F1 by saying things like "we don't want to see lots of cars dropping out of the race." Well, they wouldn't, because the drivers would have to respect the track.
Mr. Sandpit, not giving any penalty at all sends the wrong signal entirely.
I do wonder if Vettel may end up jumping ship if next season goes poorly. McLaren/Mercedes next?
I think Charlie knows he f***** up on Sunday and Vettel's suffered enough. Doesn't excuse Vettel's behaviour, but I'll be honest, it was just about the only interesting thing about the race. They probably don't want the drivers to tone down the radio chat.
My advice to Vettel, or any of the other drivers for that matter, if they don't like the way F1 has gone, try something else. The oval racing in the US is very exciting and doesn't have the nonsense of giving up position when someone goes off the track. A mistake on an oval ends up with a big crash and the end of the race.
He didn't 'f' up. He said straight away they would look at the incident and penalise Verstappen after the race if necessary. Which is exactly what happened. Vettel was also in line for a penalty and a more sever one at that so why is did he not moan about that not being imposed immediately. As it is he stole Ricciardo's place on the podium.
Exactly. FIA look very weak in not doing anything about a driver who used a string of expletives, including several f.offs aimed at the race director.
Heat of the moment or not, you just can't say things like that in any sport. As I said above, I'd give him a meaningful fine and a sizeable chunk of his free time to aid the FIA's road safety programme.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
I've just noticed that the adjusted forecast includes a +1.5% trend adjustment for Trump. That is 0.2% per day until the election. I've been mentally adding a trend projection to Trump's share but it's already in his number.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is an adjustment of data from older polls according to the movement of the average since they were taken, not a projection forward in time to election day. At least that's the way it's described for the state-by-state estimates, though the process seems rather circular when applied to national polls: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-users-guide-to-fivethirtyeights-2016-general-election-forecast/
If Trump does do it, he has an awful lot to thank Mike Pence for - particularly wrt Utah and Arizona I think.
If he wins narrowly, he will owe his victory entirely to James Comey.
More accurately, he’ll owe it to the disgraced ex-congressman, Anthony Weiner's laptop.
The point is that Weiner's laptop may contain nothing of relevance. Regardless of that, Comey decided to make an announcement, and that has had a very clear effect on the polls.
Supposing Clinton's lead ends up being cut by 4 points, and Trump wins the election by 2 points, and then it turns out that there's wasn't anything relevant on the laptop anyway?
It’s a chicken or egg argument. Ultimately, only Clinton has herself to blame for the initial FBI investigation and the reopening of the second, ably assisted by Huma Abedin’s stupidity.
Until recently Huma was a second daughter to Mrs Clinton but today was dismissed as " one of my staffers ". Hillary is the vilest of her sex.
Mr. 86, that does sound like a line from the FIA from Brundle. As for 'a lot of cars' there was 1 retirement in the last race. Japan had 0, for the second year in a row. Japan, which has gravel traps and close barriers in places.
Frankly, some crashes would've made the middle 65 laps of the Mexican Grand Prix altogether more interesting.
F1: apparently 50% chance of heavy rain for the next race (higher chance on the preceding day). If it's wet, that may make Hamilton the title favourite.
Lewis quite likes rainy days in Brazil Filipe Massa, not so much.
Is all the hysteria on here down to that ABC poll? When I was lurking yesterday, JackW posted several polls which looked pretty okay for Clinton.
There has been more than one good poll for Trump in recent days.
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
The only polls which I've seen him close the gap nationally, are the ABC polls. I don't take LA Times/Rasmussen seriously, if those are the polls you're referring to.
I've just noticed that the adjusted forecast includes a +1.5% trend adjustment for Trump. That is 0.2% per day until the election. I've been mentally adding a trend projection to Trump's share but it's already in his number.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is an adjustment of data from older polls according to the movement of the average since they were taken, not a projection forward in time to election day. At least that's the way it's described for the state-by-state estimates, though the process seems rather circular when applied to national polls: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-users-guide-to-fivethirtyeights-2016-general-election-forecast/
Comments
It looks to me as though the real question is still the same as it's been all along - whether there's a systematic error in the polls. Though now, of course, a much smaller error would be enough to give Trump the election.
If it looks close, the stop Trump vote will turn out.
His main problem is his narcissism, and belief the rules don't apply to him and he can say and do whatever he likes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37835642
I've nothing against Vettel, but that crossed a line and he should take some manner of punishment.
Pennsylvania OCT. 25-31 Google Consumer Surveys
B 1,029 LV 37% 39% 4% Trump +3 Trump +3
What makes Queent Elizabeth II great is her knowhow, a much under recognised talent.
Bill Mitchell
FACTS: 2008, the Primaries were D+8 and the GE D+7. In 2016, the Primaries were R+1 and pollsters sampling D+10. D+10 polls have Trump +1.
Something to argue over
https://youtu.be/XspT70yEhTI
I doubt the Scots want to become part of Greater Ireland.
Adams County - Wisconsin
Merrimack - New Hampshire
Jefferson - Colorado
Dauphin - Pennsylvania
Bay County - Michigan
Then again, Caesar was full of himself. But he won two wars. And then enjoyed just less than a year before his own side turned him into a human pincushion.
Mr. T, our stock market thought Remain would win.
Clinton has been a leading national political figure for 25 years. Who knows what people will feel when the clock gets to thirty years.
I also feel that there are a lot of shy Clinton voters out there, and republican women are in no way voting in great numbers for self confessed pussy grabber Trump
I hope you took the 6/1 on Hillary 270-299. Great insurance if you are long Trump (like me) or long Hillary blowout.
Should have fined him $100,000 and given him 30 days' "Community Service" with the FIA road safety programme, if they thought a sporting penalty inappropriate.
I do wonder if Vettel may end up jumping ship if next season goes poorly. McLaren/Mercedes next?
Speaking of which, he's just hit 30% on 538
My advice to Vettel, or any of the other drivers for that matter, if they don't like the way F1 has gone, try something else. The oval racing in the US is very exciting and doesn't have the nonsense of giving up position when someone goes off the track. A mistake on an oval ends up with a big crash and the end of the race.
I too am struggling to see this much vaunted early voting advantage for Hillary. I'm going back to Cohn's site now for a proper read.
Meanwhile, from a purely betting point of view, I could be in clover here - any Trump win, I cash in. A narrow Hillary win, I also profit thanks to the silly 6/1 on Dem 270-299 available yesterday. My only loser is the Hillary blowout. But Hillary 300+ *should* lengthen considerably given recent goings on, so may soon be able to cover that too at good odds.
The FBI unexpectedly released files on Bill Clinton’s 2001 pardon of Marc Rich https://t.co/sw0FBqib4b https://t.co/R5huxescSh
The Court of St James's.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/
[I didn't start betting until a couple of years after I joined the site, and have strong memories of not understanding how the hell anything worked. 3.75 is just under 3/1].
Supposing Clinton's lead ends up being cut by 4 points, and Trump wins the election by 2 points, and then it turns out that there's wasn't anything relevant on the laptop anyway?
This sounds like a "back off b*tch" message
Safety's important, but if anyone wants to be totally safe then they should stop driving cars at 200mph. Gravel traps, grass or astroturf would deter drivers from making track limits optional. The race officials and regulators need to get a grip.
CLINTON: Hello?
VOICE ON PHONE: Is that Secretary Clinton?
CLINTON: Yes
VOICE: Secretary Hillary Clinton?
CLINTON: Yes?
VOICE: Hillary Rodham Clinton?
...
Bet £100 - get back £375 if Trump wins.
Hillary is still a 72% chance, so very much still the favourite.
https://betdata.io/next-us-president
Still on small stakes, despite betting since 2009.
So far the takeaway from today is that Hillary's last best chance of changing the narrative by tying Trump to Russia has failed. She's now like a marathon running who's bonked with a mile to go and is now in a death march to the finish.
Heat of the moment or not, you just can't say things like that in any sport. As I said above, I'd give him a meaningful fine and a sizeable chunk of his free time to aid the FIA's road safety programme.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-mosul-islamicstate-idUSKBN12W4KR
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-users-guide-to-fivethirtyeights-2016-general-election-forecast/
Frankly, some crashes would've made the middle 65 laps of the Mexican Grand Prix altogether more interesting.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eu1f_HDRIl8
Really hope it goes down to the final race in Abu Dhabi. Mainly because I have tickets!
They both copy the styles of their favourite advisers: