Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
RCP now has Clinton leading 273-265 in the Electoral College.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
I thnk it is important to realise that Clinton is much more popular outside the USA than within the USA - so that during the night money is going to flow on her, which will probably be offsett as America wakes up. (91% of bets on Trump ffs).
In the meantime on the LA times poll, Trump hits his highest level of support (but not largest margin as Clinton is above her lowest). That will push the probability of Trump winning a bit higher on 538. A margin of 5.4 will either be 'tie' or Trump +1 after being adjusted.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
Spreadex have also woken up at last, again with fairly different prices:
Clinton 297-309 Trump 228-240 Clinton 250-ups: 60-70 Trump 250-up: 13.5-17.5
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
Spreadex have also woken up at last, again with fairly different prices:
Clinton 297-309 Trump 228-240 Clinton 250-ups: 60-70 Trump 25-up: 13.5-17.5
Focus leaflets aren't that expensive to print. That's the only cost.
The limit for byelections is £100,000.
This covers not only leaflets but rental of office space, paid for deliveries, advertising and much more.
Zac may find it easier to raise the money but harder to keep within the limit as he may have to pay for data and paid or posted deliveries as he won't have as many volunteers.
I expect Zac's spend will be close to the £100k limit.
I wonder if the Lib Dem candidate realised a by-election was going to cost her some money eg unpaid time off work at the National Physical Laboratory.
Whatever one thinks of Trump - he does have a knack for spotting a problem months ahead of the game. He called the Weiner/Huma problem over a year ago and said it again in July. He's done it again and again. His instincts are sound. Crooked Hillary is the perfect epithet - and the electorate can hang any behaviour they disapprove of on it.
''A five year restriction on immigrants claiming benefits, as is happening in Germany, would meaningfully reduce low-skilled immigration (from everywhere). ''
You boys really, really do not understand, do you?? How many times do I have to repeat it. Voters want control of immigration, because they have seen its massive power in changing countries in ways politicians could not dream of otherwise. They want that power for themselves.
That is why UKIP is still on 12%. A deal like the one you mention that doubles their share. The people who have seen the sharp end of immigration, like the Bradford article shows, are driving the bus. And they will get to their destination, whatever scraps the elite offer them to keep control of this power.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
Spreadex have also woken up at last, again with fairly different prices:
Clinton 297-309 Trump 228-240 Clinton 250-ups: 60-70 Trump 25-up: 13.5-17.5
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
@MSmithsonPB: .@Yokeronian@JolyonMaugham Looks it'll be Stay single market Continue paying £££ > Brussels Cosmetic changes on freedom of movement No say
''A five year restriction on immigrants claiming benefits, as is happening in Germany, would meaningfully reduce low-skilled immigration (from everywhere). ''
You boys really, really do not understand, do you?? How many times do I have to repeat it. Voters want control of immigration, because they have seen its massive power in changing countries in ways politicians could not dream of otherwise. They want that power for themselves.
That is why UKIP is still on 12%. A deal like the one you mention that doubles their share. The people who have seen the sharp end of immigration, like the Bradford article shows, are driving the bus. And they will get to their destination, whatever scraps the elite offer them to keep control of this power.
Voters want lower levels of immigration, and specifically lower levels of low skilled immigration.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
Spreadex have also woken up at last, again with fairly different prices:
Clinton 297-309 Trump 228-240 Clinton 250-ups: 60-70 Trump 25-up: 13.5-17.5
''A five year restriction on immigrants claiming benefits, as is happening in Germany, would meaningfully reduce low-skilled immigration (from everywhere). ''
You boys really, really do not understand, do you?? How many times do I have to repeat it. Voters want control of immigration, because they have seen its massive power in changing countries in ways politicians could not dream of otherwise. They want that power for themselves.
That is why UKIP is still on 12%. A deal like the one you mention that doubles their share. The people who have seen the sharp end of immigration, like the Bradford article shows, are driving the bus. And they will get to their destination, whatever scraps the elite offer them to keep control of this power.
Voters want lower levels of immigration, and specifically lower levels of low skilled immigration.
Voters want effect.
Which is why the Tory Leave campaign was so deceitful. People don't care who's in control as long as they get the result they want.
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
The impressive thing about the serious punters here isn't just that they're right more than they're wrong, although they are, it's the speed and grace with which they reverse themselves when the evidence changes.
Looking at Florida - last results show that 2000 more republican voters sent in mail than Democrats - but the change in the number of early voters was virtually identical.
(declared republicans still 17500 ahead of declared democrats.)
There's been quite a lot of talk about Orgreave lately. I have to say as a leftie of sorts I thought this article was excellent. As someone who knows little about those events it would be nice to see the other side put aswell.
It also brought to my mind the current divisions within the Labour party. On one side those who think of it as a painful and embarrassing episode and perhaps like one of those things in our youth when we did regrettable things. And on the other side those who see it as one of the great injustices of modern times, proof of how the establihment - particularly Tory - will always conspire against working people and their interests. A video to be played on epeat until everyone finally gets the message. Needless to say these two sides cannot reconciled.
Looking at Florida - last results show that 2000 more republican voters sent in mail than Democrats - but the change in the number of early voters was virtually identical.
(declared republicans still 17500 ahead of declared democrats.)
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
The impressive thing about the serious punters here isn't just that they're right more than they're wrong, although they are, it's the speed and grace with which they reverse themselves when the evidence changes.
Let me tell you a story about George Soros.
One day George Soros was arguing with one his senior fund managers about the direction of US long rates. Soros thought they would go higher, while his colleague thought they would go lower. They argues long and loundly about this. Voices were raised. It ended with Soros calling his colleague an idiot.
That afternoon, at the weekly partners meeting, Soros got up and told everyone that he had bought half a billion dollars of long dated US treasuries as he now expected long dated yields to fall.
The colleague was astonished and after the meeting went up to George Soros and said "but I thought you thought that rates were going up". Soros said "well, after you'd gone I thought about what you said, and I realised you were right."
That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.
Ironically, willngness to change ones mind is a characteristic we actively discourage in politicians, on the basis that it shows 'flip flopping'.
Looking at Florida - last results show that 2000 more republican voters sent in mail than Democrats - but the change in the number of early voters was virtually identical.
(declared republicans still 17500 ahead of declared democrats.)
It's all about the NPA.
Yep - but looking at how the Ds and Rs are voting could give an idea as to whether R-voting or D-voting NPAs are coming out, since presumably their enthusiasm is going to be relatively similar. If the NPAs are Hispanic D voters then that is one thing, if they are WWC R voters then that is another. (I can't imagine 28% R registered are voting D UNLESS they switched to or registered R for the primaries.)
Absent any further knowledge we have to assume 100% Rs are voting R and vice versa - i.e. R-D and D-R voting is cancelling out.
Oh - and on the 538 website - although the gap is 3+% Trump is polling at his highest average for the campaign.
''That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.''
Maybe but Soros had the good grace to admit his mistake.
Mea culpas on here are rare as hen's teeth, and some of the people who got things spectacularly wrong over the past two years still expect the right to be taken as seriously as ever.
Imagine Alistair Meeks or Scott using the phrase 'I realised you were right'
''That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.''
Maybe but Soros had the good grace to admit his mistake.
Mea culpas on here are rare as hen's teeth, and some of the people who got things spectacularly wrong over the past two years still expect the right to be taken as seriously as ever.
Imagine Alistair Meeks or Scott using the phrase 'I realised you were right'
Hardly.
Well I have been predicting a Clinton landslide for a few weeks, so I am going to be pretty embarrassed the way things are going. The FBI found a black swan lying around in their back cupboard.
I shall await the result before doing my walk of shame though.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
Spreadex have also woken up at last, again with fairly different prices:
Clinton 297-309 Trump 228-240 Clinton 250-ups: 60-70 Trump 25-up: 13.5-17.5
Those Trump 25 ups look tasty
It's an option, where the implied vol is too low.
Buy.
Fair values according to the current 538 polls-only model are:
Clinton 250-up 60.4
Clinton 270-up 45.4
Clinton 300-up 27.0
Clinton 330-up 13.7
Trump 250-up 20.0
Trump 270-up 12.9
Trump 300-up 6.1
Trump 330-up 2.4
Mea culpas on here are rare as hen's teeth, and some of the people who got things spectacularly wrong over the past two years still expect the right to be taken as seriously as ever.
Imagine Alistair Meeks or Scott using the phrase 'I realised you were right'
Hardly.
A Brexiteer admitting they were wrong is one of the signs of the end of days...
As a lot of people on here seem to think, hope and want Donald Trump to be the next POTUS, what would his election mean for the UK and the rest of the world ?
Wearing my alternate history hat, I was musing on a post-1945 world where, instead of ideological confrontation, the US and USSR had agreed on mutual co-operation and had effectively divided the world between them. As sole custodians of nuclear weapons (no proliferation) they would guarantee each other's security and their own.
The Communist economy would be propped up by the capitalist west and oil would be controlled by the US-Soviet domination of the Middle East.
Unfortunately, that's counterfactual fantasy but the truth is relations between Washington and Moscow have rarely been good (apart from when both fighting common enemies from late 1941 to 1945 and sometimes not even then). Will Trump try to rewrite that history and work with Putin against the twin scourges of Islamic fundamentalism and the rise of an economically powerful China ?
I'm sure Theresa May will be properly feted when she visits Trump's White House but apart from support for her post-Brexit deal and the carrot of a lucrative trade deal, what will a Trump administration mean for the UK ?
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
The impressive thing about the serious punters here isn't just that they're right more than they're wrong, although they are, it's the speed and grace with which they reverse themselves when the evidence changes.
Let me tell you a story about George Soros.
One day George Soros was arguing with one his senior fund managers about the direction of US long rates. Soros thought they would go higher, while his colleague thought they would go lower. They argues long and loundly about this. Voices were raised. It ended with Soros calling his colleague an idiot.
That afternoon, at the weekly partners meeting, Soros got up and told everyone that he had bought half a billion dollars of long dated US treasuries as he now expected long dated yields to fall.
The colleague was astonished and after the meeting went up to George Soros and said "but I thought you thought that rates were going up". Soros said "well, after you'd gone I thought about what you said, and I realised you were right."
That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.
Ironically, willngness to change ones mind is a characteristic we actively discourage in politicians, on the basis that it shows 'flip flopping'.
I used to work with a Prof, with whom I would argue case management quite fiercely. He respected someone who stood their ground and argued their case. You had to be very sure of your ground though, because if you were in the wrong...
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
The impressive thing about the serious punters here isn't just that they're right more than they're wrong, although they are, it's the speed and grace with which they reverse themselves when the evidence changes.
Let me tell you a story about George Soros.
One day George Soros was arguing with one his senior fund managers about the direction of US long rates. Soros thought they would go higher, while his colleague thought they would go lower. They argues long and loundly about this. Voices were raised. It ended with Soros calling his colleague an idiot.
That afternoon, at the weekly partners meeting, Soros got up and told everyone that he had bought half a billion dollars of long dated US treasuries as he now expected long dated yields to fall.
The colleague was astonished and after the meeting went up to George Soros and said "but I thought you thought that rates were going up". Soros said "well, after you'd gone I thought about what you said, and I realised you were right."
That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.
Ironically, willngness to change ones mind is a characteristic we actively discourage in politicians, on the basis that it shows 'flip flopping'.
I used to work with a Prof, with whom I would argue case management quite fiercely. He respected someone who stood their ground and argued their case. You had to be very sure of your ground though, because if you were in the wrong...
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
Quite correct - the landscape has changed out of all recognition over the past 5 or 6 days. I suppose I have to be thankful for small mercies in having bought illary in small parcels as her price has tumbled - I'm still feeling uncomfortable right now though. I'll be lucky to get through this without a good ducking and I probably need a couple of my longshots to come good to save my bacon.
I'm sure Theresa May will be properly feted when she visits Trump's White House but apart from support for her post-Brexit deal and the carrot of a lucrative trade deal, what will a Trump administration mean for the UK ?
It will mean the intellectual death of internationalist Brexitism as people realise that there is no pax-Americana safety net outside the EU.
As a lot of people on here seem to think, hope and want Donald Trump to be the next POTUS, what would his election mean for the UK and the rest of the world ?
Wearing my alternate history hat, I was musing on a post-1945 world where, instead of ideological confrontation, the US and USSR had agreed on mutual co-operation and had effectively divided the world between them. As sole custodians of nuclear weapons (no proliferation) they would guarantee each other's security and their own.
The Communist economy would be propped up by the capitalist west and oil would be controlled by the US-Soviet domination of the Middle East.
Unfortunately, that's counterfactual fantasy but the truth is relations between Washington and Moscow have rarely been good (apart from when both fighting common enemies from late 1941 to 1945 and sometimes not even then). Will Trump try to rewrite that history and work with Putin against the twin scourges of Islamic fundamentalism and the rise of an economically powerful China ?
I'm sure Theresa May will be properly feted when she visits Trump's White House but apart from support for her post-Brexit deal and the carrot of a lucrative trade deal, what will a Trump administration mean for the UK ?
We would have no idea from one week to the next what POTUS policy was. Trump will just react to one perceived slight after another. The Chiefs of Staff must be panicking like mad.
Sporting have this morning once again sharply revised downwards their spread for Hillary's ECVs (compared with last night's spreads) and increased The Donald's accordingly::
Clinton ...... 287 - 302 (-8)
Trump ...... 234 - 249 (+8)
It's still zzzzz... time in the US so new new polls expected for an hour or two.
Spreadex have also woken up at last, again with fairly different prices:
Clinton 297-309 Trump 228-240 Clinton 250-ups: 60-70 Trump 25-up: 13.5-17.5
Those Trump 25 ups look tasty
It's an option, where the implied vol is too low.
Buy.
Fair values according to the current 538 polls-only model are:
Clinton 250-up 60.4
Clinton 270-up 45.4
Clinton 300-up 27.0
Clinton 330-up 13.7
Trump 250-up 20.0
Trump 270-up 12.9
Trump 300-up 6.1
Trump 330-up 2.4
Of course 538 is the most aggressive on Trump's chances, because they anticipate more volatility (now mostly in that the polls might be wrong).
FWIW, I'm inclined to agree with them; some of the other models take polling numbers [however averaged] with far too much trust. For example, HuffPo's Senate model is hilariously tight: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/senate
''A Brexiteer admitting they were wrong is one of the signs of the end of days...''
Maybe you have a point. Personally I think any form of Brexit is far from ideal, but its still better than our previous direction of travel.
I have no problem with immigration myself, but then I'm not one of the white people who moved out of Blackburn, Newham et al, as the Guardian article recounts.
''That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.''
Maybe but Soros had the good grace to admit his mistake.
Mea culpas on here are rare as hen's teeth, and some of the people who got things spectacularly wrong over the past two years still expect the right to be taken as seriously as ever.
Imagine Alistair Meeks or Scott using the phrase 'I realised you were right'
Hardly.
I have admitted to many mistakes over the years. Your public apology is duly awaited.
Of course 538 is the most aggressive on Trump's chances, because they anticipate more volatility (now mostly in that the polls might be wrong).
FWIW, I'm inclined to agree with them; some of the other models take polling numbers [however averaged] with far too much trust. For example, HuffPo's Senate model is hilariously tight: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/senate
Yes, 538's probability distributions have long tails in both directions. HuffPost is as you say very narrow, the NYT model is between the two:
''A five year restriction on immigrants claiming benefits, as is happening in Germany, would meaningfully reduce low-skilled immigration (from everywhere). ''
You boys really, really do not understand, do you?? How many times do I have to repeat it. Voters want control of immigration, because they have seen its massive power in changing countries in ways politicians could not dream of otherwise. They want that power for themselves.
That is why UKIP is still on 12%. A deal like the one you mention that doubles their share. The people who have seen the sharp end of immigration, like the Bradford article shows, are driving the bus. And they will get to their destination, whatever scraps the elite offer them to keep control of this power.
Voters want lower levels of immigration, and specifically lower levels of low skilled immigration.
Voters want effect.
Voters naturally would like the government to have control over its borders. It would be a much lower priority however if immigration levels were lower and they felt reasonably safe and secure.
But deals like CETA assume that (for example) the UK will adhere to all EU rules, for example on product safety. Grandfathering would surely mean that we don't change anything relevant to the treaty, so the Leaver fantasy of 'sovereignty' in trade would fall by the wayside. Whilst in practice I suspect that is what we'll do, we might as well stay in the customs union while we're about it.
@MSmithsonPB: .@Yokeronian@JolyonMaugham Looks it'll be Stay single market Continue paying £££ > Brussels Cosmetic changes on freedom of movement No say
The EU’s balance of power will shift against its more market-oriented members if the U.K. drops out, the German government’s council of economic advisers said, calling for “constructive negotiations” to keep Britain in the EU despite the Brexit referendum.
I rate Nate Silver's model highly but it is an aggregation. It describes the situation, probably accurately, that existed one to two weeks ago. When there's a move just before electron day as there is currently to Trump, his model may not catch up to the actual result.
I couldn't find a good link explaining all of this but I think his model is a lot more aggressive than that, especially late in the campaign. It weighs new polls more heavily than old polls, and assumes states are correlated so even if there hasn't been any post-something-vague-to-do-with-emails-gate polling in a state it should move to reflect the polls in states where there has been polling.
Bear in mind it takes several days for poll data to be collected and published in addition to any trend analysis showing up in 538.
The interesting thing about 538's models is that it sees each state as a separate but related election. So if there is a new poll in Pennsylavania, it says let's adjust Michigan as measured in previous polls there because it is demographically similar, but Colorado less so because the demographics are different.
I can't see any meaningful changes in product standards, irrespective. All electronics, for example, are FCC, CE and UL certified, no matter where they are sold in the world.
Well exactly. I got seriously flamed by some of the usual suspects for making that obvious point before the referendum.
So, sorry guys, if you voted for Brexit in the hope of being able to buy a mega-powerful vacuum cleaner, you're set for a disappointment.
I didn't vote for Brexit, but I'm sorry to hear that I won't be able to buy a decent powered vacuum in the coming years and decades
I can't see any meaningful changes in product standards, irrespective. All electronics, for example, are FCC, CE and UL certified, no matter where they are sold in the world.
Well exactly. I got seriously flamed by some of the usual suspects for making that obvious point before the referendum.
So, sorry guys, if you voted for Brexit in the hope of being able to buy a mega-powerful vacuum cleaner, you're set for a disappointment.
I didn't vote for Brexit, but I'm sorry to hear that I won't be able to buy a decent powered vacuum in the coming years and decades
But it's from dead heat to 5.4% in a week. A dramatic looking divergence.
I have to admit to not having a scoobie how this is now going to pan out. It still seems inconceivable on a gut level that Trump could win, but damn it, he is all they have if you REALLY don't like Hillary. And it seems a lot of people REALLY don't like HIllary.....
Bono wins woman of the year award. Yes. That Bono of U2.
Not been a good week for women, first the UN chooses a fictional one to represent them and now a man wins woman of the year award. What a time to be alive.
But it's from dead heat to 5.4% in a week. A dramatic looking divergence.
I have to admit to not having a scoobie how this is now going to pan out. It still seems inconceivable on a gut level that Trump could win, but damn it, he is all they have if you REALLY don't like Hillary. And it seems a lot of people REALLY don't like HIllary.....
It's good to see that Spreadex are sticking with a still too big 12 point spread on their ECV market, compared with an altogether far too greedy 15 point spread introduced by Sporting, which frankly makes betting on this market all but unfeasible.
Bit confused by RCP's poll selection. They are only selecting 6 polls and Pew's Clinton +7 20-25 October isn't included whilst the Fox Clinton +5 22-25 October is.
Adding Pew Shifts Average from Clinton +1.7 to +2.4
But it's from dead heat to 5.4% in a week. A dramatic looking divergence.
I have to admit to not having a scoobie how this is now going to pan out. It still seems inconceivable on a gut level that Trump could win, but damn it, he is all they have if you REALLY don't like Hillary. And it seems a lot of people REALLY don't like HIllary.....
Especially the FBI
Yeah... But going to war with the FBI has to be the weirdest final week Grid ever seen in a Presidential race!
I seem to remember the PB Cognosti advising a buy on Clinton at around 330+...
The impressive thing about the serious punters here isn't just that they're right more than they're wrong, although they are, it's the speed and grace with which they reverse themselves when the evidence changes.
Let me tell you a story about George Soros.
One day George Soros was arguing with one his senior fund managers about the direction of US long rates. Soros thought they would go higher, while his colleague thought they would go lower. They argues long and loundly about this. Voices were raised. It ended with Soros calling his colleague an idiot.
That afternoon, at the weekly partners meeting, Soros got up and told everyone that he had bought half a billion dollars of long dated US treasuries as he now expected long dated yields to fall.
The colleague was astonished and after the meeting went up to George Soros and said "but I thought you thought that rates were going up". Soros said "well, after you'd gone I thought about what you said, and I realised you were right."
That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.
Ironically, willngness to change ones mind is a characteristic we actively discourage in politicians, on the basis that it shows 'flip flopping'.
The difference is that people like Soros surround themselves with people whom they trust to challenge his view. Politicians surround themselves with people who will unquestioningly agree with them. Guess who wins in the game of life?
Trump win probability with 538.com moves above 30% .....little more than a week ago it was 13%!
I honestly think he's going to pull it off. The polling is crap with D+ 8-10. If he was any other person, he wouldn't have such scorn - the MSN are so OTT and showing desperation. The NYT today had a nonsense piece about his business tax dealings from 1991 - when what he did was legal - IIRC, it took IRS until 2004 to close the loophole.
The EU’s balance of power will shift against its more market-oriented members if the U.K. drops out, the German government’s council of economic advisers said, calling for “constructive negotiations” to keep Britain in the EU despite the Brexit referendum.
Mr. Putney, down seven stakes, more or less, in the weekend bets. It'll be the first red season since around 2011.
The Verstappen bet was undoubtedly good but that and the Button bet are rare events due as much to luck (catching the news on Twitter in time for the bet) as anything else. My judgement at the last race was miles off, as it has been multiple times this season.
Trump win probability with 538.com moves above 30% .....little more than a week ago it was 13%!
I honestly think he's going to pull it off. The polling is crap with D+ 8-10. If he was any other person, he wouldn't have such scorn - the MSN are so OTT and showing desperation. The NYT today had a nonsense piece about his business tax dealings from 1991 - when what he did was legal - IIRC, it took IRS until 2004 to close the loophole.
At this point it's hard to see how the narrative will change. The only unknown is how the real prospect of President Trump affects turnout. In reality the effect is probably negligible as most people don't follow the day to day movements and moods of the campaigns.
The failure of Clinton's campaign to pin something on Trump regarding Russia shows that the writing is on the wall.
"FBI DOCUMENTS: Hillary Aide Cheryl Mills Orders Technicians to Delete Emails By Bleachbit
The FBI released edited documents from their Clinton Email Investigation a few weeks ago.
From the FBI website:
Hillary Rodham Clinton served as U.S. Secretary of State from January 21, 2009 to February 1, 2013. The FBI conducted an investigation into allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure.
The FBI released the documents in four sections, linked below:
In part 3 of their release the FBI reports on Cheryl Mills ordering technicians to delete emails by BleachBit. Page 24 of section 3:
Trump win probability with 538.com moves above 30% .....little more than a week ago it was 13%!
I honestly think he's going to pull it off. The polling is crap with D+ 8-10. If he was any other person, he wouldn't have such scorn - the MSN are so OTT and showing desperation. The NYT today had a nonsense piece about his business tax dealings from 1991 - when what he did was legal - IIRC, it took IRS until 2004 to close the loophole.
At this point it's hard to see how the narrative will change. The only unknown is how the real prospect of President Trump affects turnout. In reality the effect is probably negligible as most people don't follow the day to day movements and moods of the campaigns.
The failure of Clinton's campaign to pin something on Trump regarding Russia shows that the writing is on the wall.
Americans are less fagged about Russians than they are about Climate Change. It's that much.
That Hillary wheeled out gangster getaway driver moll Miss Universe to shame Trump for commenting on what beauty queens look like yesterday...
I'm waiting for the DNC to drop a bombshell on Trump - and still nothing. She was in total unhinged rant mode when a single Bill Is A ********* protestor waved a placard.
Comments
http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-presidential-campaign-tv-ads/
Clinton spending nothing in Colorado or Virginia
In the meantime on the LA times poll, Trump hits his highest level of support (but not largest margin as Clinton is above her lowest). That will push the probability of Trump winning a bit higher on 538. A margin of 5.4 will either be 'tie' or Trump +1 after being adjusted.
Clinton 297-309
Trump 228-240
Clinton 250-ups: 60-70
Trump 250-up: 13.5-17.5
Colorado perhaps a bit complacement imo.
You boys really, really do not understand, do you?? How many times do I have to repeat it. Voters want control of immigration, because they have seen its massive power in changing countries in ways politicians could not dream of otherwise. They want that power for themselves.
That is why UKIP is still on 12%. A deal like the one you mention that doubles their share. The people who have seen the sharp end of immigration, like the Bradford article shows, are driving the bus. And they will get to their destination, whatever scraps the elite offer them to keep control of this power.
Voters want effect.
Buy.
Just how deep are you against Killary now
(declared republicans still 17500 ahead of declared democrats.)
I think that's wrong. But let's see.
(I have my eyes on a Microsoft HoloLens)
http://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/paul-t-horgan-the-left-denies-it-but-two-sides-fought-at-orgreave/
It also brought to my mind the current divisions within the Labour party. On one side those who think of it as a painful and embarrassing episode and perhaps like one of those things in our youth when we did regrettable things. And on the other side those who see it as one of the great injustices of modern times, proof of how the establihment - particularly Tory - will always conspire against working people and their interests. A video to be played on epeat until everyone finally gets the message. Needless to say these two sides cannot reconciled.
One day George Soros was arguing with one his senior fund managers about the direction of US long rates. Soros thought they would go higher, while his colleague thought they would go lower. They argues long and loundly about this. Voices were raised. It ended with Soros calling his colleague an idiot.
That afternoon, at the weekly partners meeting, Soros got up and told everyone that he had bought half a billion dollars of long dated US treasuries as he now expected long dated yields to fall.
The colleague was astonished and after the meeting went up to George Soros and said "but I thought you thought that rates were going up". Soros said "well, after you'd gone I thought about what you said, and I realised you were right."
That's the difference between a great trader and a crap one. You change your mind.
Ironically, willngness to change ones mind is a characteristic we actively discourage in politicians, on the basis that it shows 'flip flopping'.
Case 1: Trump wins Utah; Clinton 269, Trump 269
Pence needs only 1 EC vote for his name to go to the HoR conclave.
Trump 1.5
Pence 3
Clinton 500
Case 2: McMullin wins Utah: Clinton 263-269, Trump 269-263, McMullin 6
McMullin is now a player. If he keeps hold of his 6 votes, Pence needs 7; if he hands over 4, that will be sufficient for Pence's name to go through.
Trump 1.66
Pence 2.7
McMullin 40
Clinton 500
Absent any further knowledge we have to assume 100% Rs are voting R and vice versa - i.e. R-D and D-R voting is cancelling out.
Oh - and on the 538 website - although the gap is 3+% Trump is polling at his highest average for the campaign.
Maybe but Soros had the good grace to admit his mistake.
Mea culpas on here are rare as hen's teeth, and some of the people who got things spectacularly wrong over the past two years still expect the right to be taken as seriously as ever.
Imagine Alistair Meeks or Scott using the phrase 'I realised you were right'
Hardly.
I shall await the result before doing my walk of shame though.
Clinton 250-up 60.4 Clinton 270-up 45.4 Clinton 300-up 27.0 Clinton 330-up 13.7 Trump 250-up 20.0 Trump 270-up 12.9 Trump 300-up 6.1 Trump 330-up 2.4As a lot of people on here seem to think, hope and want Donald Trump to be the next POTUS, what would his election mean for the UK and the rest of the world ?
Wearing my alternate history hat, I was musing on a post-1945 world where, instead of ideological confrontation, the US and USSR had agreed on mutual co-operation and had effectively divided the world between them. As sole custodians of nuclear weapons (no proliferation) they would guarantee each other's security and their own.
The Communist economy would be propped up by the capitalist west and oil would be controlled by the US-Soviet domination of the Middle East.
Unfortunately, that's counterfactual fantasy but the truth is relations between Washington and Moscow have rarely been good (apart from when both fighting common enemies from late 1941 to 1945 and sometimes not even then). Will Trump try to rewrite that history and work with Putin against the twin scourges of Islamic fundamentalism and the rise of an economically powerful China ?
I'm sure Theresa May will be properly feted when she visits Trump's White House but apart from support for her post-Brexit deal and the carrot of a lucrative trade deal, what will a Trump administration mean for the UK ?
This was interesting via Bloomberg:
Bloomberg - Clinton Leads Trump With Independents: Bloomberg Poll http://bloom.bg/2fDL5vQ
https://twitter.com/politico/status/793776692783419393
FWIW, I'm inclined to agree with them; some of the other models take polling numbers [however averaged] with far too much trust. For example, HuffPo's Senate model is hilariously tight: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/senate
Maybe you have a point. Personally I think any form of Brexit is far from ideal, but its still better than our previous direction of travel.
I have no problem with immigration myself, but then I'm not one of the white people who moved out of Blackburn, Newham et al, as the Guardian article recounts.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html
I apologise!
Big: Judge orders NV GOP/Trump and Trump campaign to appear in court and produce material to solicit poll watchers. https://www.scribd.com/document/329747608/NSDP-v-NVGOP-Boulware-Order-1 …
When I may admit being wrong with a crisp £10 note...
The EU’s balance of power will shift against its more market-oriented members if the U.K. drops out, the German government’s council of economic advisers said, calling for “constructive negotiations” to keep Britain in the EU despite the Brexit referendum.
There seems to be a move by the far-right/KKK to intimidate AA voters at polling booths, think this is where this is coming from.
Bear in mind it takes several days for poll data to be collected and published in addition to any trend analysis showing up in 538.
The interesting thing about 538's models is that it sees each state as a separate but related election. So if there is a new poll in Pennsylavania, it says let's adjust Michigan as measured in previous polls there because it is demographically similar, but Colorado less so because the demographics are different.
Time for this lady, me thinks. Bernie voter converted to Trump
https://youtu.be/rDz7Co2pbJA
NOBODY should be intimidated when trying to vote.
I have to admit to not having a scoobie how this is now going to pan out. It still seems inconceivable on a gut level that Trump could win, but damn it, he is all they have if you REALLY don't like Hillary. And it seems a lot of people REALLY don't like HIllary.....
Not been a good week for women, first the UN chooses a fictional one to represent them and now a man wins woman of the year award. What a time to be alive.
Exclusive: FBI investigating alleged illegal donor scheme tied to Dem Senate candidate https://t.co/eNQ6ulZqFs #wednesdaywisdom https://t.co/Oiqpkuq8EE
Bruce Porter Jnr
Arab list came with special note to exclude Christians – they had to be Muslim. 26 Wikileaks
https://t.co/Ap86z9tspM https://t.co/q8SCO9T5CX
Adding Pew Shifts Average from Clinton +1.7 to +2.4
NEW: Clinton trails Trump among likely voters on honesty and trustworthiness in new @ABC News/WaPo tracking poll https://t.co/PQ97BYmHGf https://t.co/7g8zfs25Bq
https://twitter.com/JesseRodriguez/status/793803294762266624
The Verstappen bet was undoubtedly good but that and the Button bet are rare events due as much to luck (catching the news on Twitter in time for the bet) as anything else. My judgement at the last race was miles off, as it has been multiple times this season.
The failure of Clinton's campaign to pin something on Trump regarding Russia shows that the writing is on the wall.
http://linkis.com/thegatewaypundit.com/WHA5R
"FBI DOCUMENTS: Hillary Aide Cheryl Mills Orders Technicians to Delete Emails By Bleachbit
The FBI released edited documents from their Clinton Email Investigation a few weeks ago.
From the FBI website:
Hillary Rodham Clinton served as U.S. Secretary of State from January 21, 2009 to February 1, 2013. The FBI conducted an investigation into allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure.
The FBI released the documents in four sections, linked below:
In part 3 of their release the FBI reports on Cheryl Mills ordering technicians to delete emails by BleachBit.
Page 24 of section 3:
BREAKING: Major @HillaryClinton Donor Inside Dem Fundraiser:Blacks Are “Seriously F***ed in The Head" https://t.co/gXlDctEmxu @DeborahRossNC
Oh my word Video
That Hillary wheeled out gangster getaway driver moll Miss Universe to shame Trump for commenting on what beauty queens look like yesterday...
I'm waiting for the DNC to drop a bombshell on Trump - and still nothing. She was in total unhinged rant mode when a single Bill Is A ********* protestor waved a placard.
It was bizarre.
http://nypost.com/2016/11/02/hillary-loses-her-cool-after-heckler-calls-bill-a-rapist/
Indeed since it is likely that church supporters are more likely to be Trump supporters that it was Democrats that did it.
"@HillaryClinton ally compares black Republicans to Jews who aided Nazis in @PVeritas_Action video" https://t.co/IBJxbcqvMM @WashTimes
And Erm
Ent
@JamesOKeefeIII @HillaryClinton @PVeritas_Action @WashTimes so basically to George Soros? That jew who helped the Nazis, you know.